J&J
to stand behind talc's safety at upcoming trials: lawyer
Send a link to a friend
[May 18, 2016]
By Jessica Dye
NEW YORK (Reuters) - Johnson & Johnson will
keep aruging in court that its talc-based powders are safe, an outside
lawyer who has defended the company in lawsuits said, even after losing
two multimillion-dollar verdicts to plaintiffs who alleged that J&J Baby
Powder and Shower to Shower caused ovarian cancer.
|
Gene Williams blamed those verdicts on confusion created by
plaintiffs' lawyers at the trial. The Houston-based lawyer insisted
in a recent interview that there "is no proven linkage between talc
and ovarian cancer, and the vast majority of scientific and
regulatory bodies, who have reviewed the same studies the plaintiffs
point to, do not accept the premise."
Two talc lawsuits are scheduled for trial this fall, one in Missouri
and one in New Jersey. At least 1,400 cases have been filed over the
issue, mostly in Missouri, where state court rules are seen as
friendly to plaintiffs.
Three cases on the issue have gone to trial in which plaintiffs
pointed to studies dating back three decades, saying they show talc
use on the genitals can raise women’s ovarian cancer risk between 30
and 60 percent. J&J said subsequent larger, more comprehensive
studies found no conclusive link between the product and cancer.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/e8f04/e8f04d26d5775ef8a45a33bef8fedde67d890f7f" alt=""
“The science supporting the safety of talc has gotten stronger and
stronger," Williams said.
In February, a jury in St. Louis, Missouri, awarded $72 million to a
woman who claimed she developed ovarian cancer from using J&J's Baby
Powder and Shower to Shower products for feminine hygiene. Another
jury, before the same St. Louis judge, returned a $55 million award
in a similar case. J&J has said it will appeal both awards.
Valeant Pharmaceuticals <VRX.TO> acquired Shower to Shower from J&J
by in 2012.
An earlier trial in South Dakota ended in 2013 with the jury finding
J&J had been negligent but declining to award damages.
Neither side appealed the South Dakota case.
[to top of second column] |
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/ab283/ab283ddc10b0dd9bb9bf969034b55f104781c1f2" alt=""
Following the Ristesund verdict, plaintiffs' lawyer Jere Beasely,
whose firm Beasley Allen has been one of the most active in filing
talc lawsuits, issued a statement calling for J&J to establish a
compensation fund to settle the remaining talc cases.
Asked whether J&J would consider settling, company spokeswoman Carol
Goodrich said it was preparing for the upcoming trials this fall.
Williams, a partner at Shook, Hardy & Bacon, has represented J&J in
all three talc lawsuits that have gone to trial. He mainly defends
medical drug and device companies, including Eli Lilly and Co and
Bristol Myers Squibb.
(Reporting by Jessica Dye; Editing by Anthony Lin and David
Gregorio)
[© 2016 Thomson Reuters. All rights
reserved.] Copyright 2016 Reuters. All rights reserved. This material may not be published,
broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/1ca7b/1ca7bc5be55b615f77479982a3520c94b38f3fb5" alt=""
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/0f626/0f62653738eb6902ff40949cc882cbf75cb6874b" alt="" |