Missouri court cuts J&J talc verdict to $2.1 billion
ST. LOUIS — A Missouri appeals court refused to toss out a $4.7 billion jury verdict against Johnson & Johnson over cancer claims linked to talc-based products including baby powder but agreed to cut the total payout to $2.1 billion to the women who sued the company.
In a unanimous 83-page opinion issued Tuesday, a three-judge panel said 2018 trial testimony by plaintiffs’ experts about the risk of asbestos exposure from talc-powder use was based on “reasonable methodology” and provided the St. Louis jury a legitimate basis for holding J&J liable for the cancers in almost two dozen women.
While the judges upheld $500 million in actual damages awarded to the women, they cut the punitive damages to about $1.6 billion from about $4 billion. That brought the total down to $2.1 billion. J&J, which denies its talc powder is tainted with asbestos, plans to appeal the court’s decision.
The women blamed their ovarian cancers on use of asbestos-laced talc powder. Jurors awarded each woman $25 million in compensatory damages. The panel then added more than $4 billion in punitive damages.
J&J, which pulled its talc-based baby powder off the shelves in the U.S. and Canada last month, still faces almost 20,000 lawsuits blaming the iconic product for causing either ovarian cancer or mesothelioma, a cancer linked specifically to asbestos exposure.
The New Brunswick, New Jersey-based company has lost other cases at trial, with juries across the country ordering it to pay hundreds of millions of dollars in damages. Judges slashed some of those awards while others have been thrown out or are on appeal. J&J also has won some cases.
The plaintiffs contend J&J knew from the early 1970s some of the talc used in its baby powders was laced with asbestos and hid it from consumers. The company refused to put any warning label on its iconic white bottles. J&J executives said the decision in May to remove its talcbased products from the U.S. market was made for business decisions.
J&J also argued the vast majority of the 22 women whose claims were combined in the case weren’t Missouri residents and shouldn’t have been able to sue in the state.
The appeals court knocked out the awards for two women who were from out of state. But the judges rejected the company’s argument for 15 other plaintiffs, saying they had a legitimate basis for suing in Missouri because they used a talc-based powder called Shimmer — produced for J&J by a company based in Union, which is about 50 miles east of St. Louis.
Several other talc verdicts won by out-of-state plaintiffs in Missouri have been thrown out on appeal because of the debate over whether Shimmer’s production in the state justifies allowing St. Louis juries to decide non-residents’ claims.
The U.S. Supreme Court sought to crack down on so-called litigation tourism in 2017, ruling there has to be a connection between the state court and the specific claims at issue.