The Legal Examiner Affiliate Network The Legal Examiner The Legal Examiner The Legal Examiner search feed instagram google-plus avvo phone envelope checkmark mail-reply spinner error close The Legal Examiner The Legal Examiner The Legal Examiner
Skip to main content
| Dr. Shezad Malik Law Firm

California Talc Lawsuit $417M Verdict. California jurors hearing the first talcum powder case to proceed to trial in the state have awarded $417 million to the plaintiff who claimed that she developed ovarian cancer after using the cosmetic powder.

J&J Talcum Powder Ovarian Cancer link
Medical researchers and jurors agree, Talcum Powder use linked to deadly Ovarian Cancer in women.

The California Superior Court for Los Angeles County jury reached the verdict today against Johnson & Johnson and Johnson & Johnson Consumer Inc. The jury’s verdict comes after a three-week trial and more than two days of deliberations. The $417 million verdict includes $347 million in punitive damages.

Eva Echeverria, who is now 63 years old began using the company’s talc products for routine feminine hygiene when she was 11. Echeverria was diagnosed with ovarian cancer in 2007. According to Echeverria, Johnson & Johnson has failed to adequately warn about the ovarian cancer risk associated with long-term talcum powder use for feminine hygiene purposes.

Echeverria claimed that Johnson & Johnson knew or should have known about the link between talcum powder and cancer since at least 1982 when an epidemiologic study found a 92% increased risk of ovarian tumors among women who reported genital talc use.

Talcum Powder Litigation

Johnson & Johnson is exposed to several thousand similar Baby Powder lawsuits and Shower-to-Shower lawsuits, each alleging that talc contained in the products moved through the vagina following regular and long-term use, causing the development of ovarian cancer.

The lawsuits highlight studies from the 1970s and later, that found that the regular, repeated use of talc-based powders to the female genitals could contribute to the development of ovarian cancer. Plaintiffs claim that Johnson & Johnson has long been aware of these findings, but chose not to warn the public in order to protect sales of its popular Shower-to-Shower and Baby Powder products and placed profits over people.

Echeverria’s lawsuit is the first of some 300 cases to go to trial in California’s talcum powder litigation. Thousands of other talcum powder lawsuits are pending against Johnson & Johnson in Missouri, New Jersey, and Delaware state courts, as well as New Jersey federal court.

Talcum Powder Trial Verdicts

There have been at least four massive multimillion dollar verdicts against Johnson & Johnson over failure to warn about the risks associated with talcum powder.

The Missouri litigation is the nation’s largest and has already rendered verdicts in five talcum powder trials. The first trial was in February 2016, when the family of an Alabama woman who died from ovarian cancer was awarded $10 million in compensatory damages, as well as $62 million in punitive damages.

In May 2015, Johnson & Johnson was ordered to pay $55 million ($5 million compensatory, $50 million punitive) to a South Dakota ovarian cancer victim.

In October 2016, another Missouri jury awarded $70 million, including $2.5 million in compensatory damages and $67.5 million in punitive damages, to a third plaintiff.

Johnson & Johnson’s only win in Missouri was in March. That victory was short-lived when the company was hammered with its largest talcum powder verdict just two months later when another Missouri jury awarded more than $100 million in compensatory and punitive damages to the plaintiff in the state’s fifth trial.

And now the Echeverria verdict adds another nail to the Johnson & Johnson talcum powder litigation. The case is Echeverria et al v. Johnson & Johnson, Los Angeles Superior Court, No. BC628228.

If you think you may have developed Ovarian Cancer after the use of Johnson & Johnson Baby Powder or Shower to Shower talc products, please call Dr. Shezad Malik Law Firm at 888-210-9693.

Comments for this article are closed, but you may still contact the author privately.