Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 10 OCTOBER 2016

Update On Talc Litigation: "Made-For-Litigation" Testimony Of Plaintiffs' Experts Barred, Resulting In Dismissals

Defendants are fighting back by attacking the core of the plaintiff's case, that is, plaintiff's ability to demonstrate to a jury that their use of talcum powder caused cancer.

United StatesLitigation, Mediation & Arbitration

In our August 1, 2016 newsletter, we reported on "Talc and The Possible Link to Cancer," which profiled two recent multi-million dollar verdicts against Johnson & Johnson by plaintiffs who alleged that they developed ovarian cancer from their use of talcum powder. Claims of talc-related injuries continue to increase nationwide. Product manufacturers, such as Johnson & Johnson, but also talc suppliers, are being named in suits for ovarian cancer and also in asbestos actions.

Defendants are fighting back by attacking the core of the plaintiff's case, that is, plaintiff's ability to demonstrate to a jury that their use of talcum powder caused cancer. Last month, a New Jersey court, in its important role as "gatekeeper" dismissed two talc-based ovarian cancer cases. In Brandi Carl and Diana Balderrama v. Johnson & Johnson, et al., Superior Court of New Jersey: Atlantic City, Talc-Based Powder Products Litigation, Civil Action No. 300 (MCL), Docket No. ATL-L-6564-14 & ATL-

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

See more popular content from