$27.4M verdict for man who said talc sold by J&J caused cancer

LOS ANGELES -- A jury awarded $27.4 million Tuesday, after a 38-day trial, to a man who said his exposure to asbestos through Johnson & Johnson's talcum powder caused his cancer.

Lead plaintiff's counsel Danny R. Kraft Jr., a New York-based associate attorney of Weitz & Luxenberg PC, said he was happy with the verdict but there's no amount of money that's going to make [his client] not have mesothelioma."

After three days of deliberation, the jury awarded California residents Shawn and Holly Johnson $2.45 million in noneconomic damages for past and future pain, suffering and medical expenses incurred as a result of Shawn Johnson's mesothelioma, potentially caused by his exposure to asbestos through J&J talcum powder.

Superior Court Judge Stephen M. Moloney thanked jurors for their many days of service before releasing them Tuesday.

While it was not unanimous in its verdicts on 18 questions, the 12-member jury found clear and convincing evidence that J&J executives acted with malice or fraud, slamming the company with $25 million in punitive damages. The verdicts ranged from 9-3 to 11-1.

"We're very happy that a decadeslong user of Johnson and Johnson's products was able to convince a jury that Johnson and Johnson's conduct was malicious and despicable and awarded significant money damages and found Johnson and Johnson conduct to be punitive," Kraft said.

While King & Spalding attorneys for Johnson & Johnson did not respond to request for comment Tuesday, the company has continually denied that any of its products contain asbestos or cause mesothelioma.

"The stories of anyone suffering from any form of cancer are tragic, and we sympathize deeply with these patients and their families, and appreciate that they're seeking answers," Johnson & Johnson said in a statement. "The science and the facts, however, show that their illnesses were not caused by their use of our talcum-based products."

The lawsuit in Los Angeles, is one of thousands filed in the U.S. as part of the Johnson & Johnson talcum powder asbestos cases. Some have been consolidated into a federal multidistrict litigation in New Jersey. Others like this one brought by the Johnsons, have been consolidated into a Judicial Council Coordinated Proceeding in California.

Despite J&J winning some cases since thousands of mesothelioma patients began filing suits in 2016, juries have returned billions of dollars in plaintiff verdicts, and lawsuits continue to pour in. Many of the settlements have been with individual plaintiffs for undisclosed amounts.

While Kraft couldn't say how Tuesday's verdict could affect settlement discussion in the many talcum powder lawsuits consolidated in California, he did say that if juries continue awarding plaintiffs significant awards, Johnson & Johnson may consider settling with bigger groups of cases rather than on an individual basis.

"Juries in multiple cities in multiple cases have heard the same kind of evidence and have reached the same result," Kraft said. "The more plaintiff verdicts there are, I think the louder the voice becomes to the people at Johnson and Johnson, that hey, it's time to effectuate some change, and maybe it's time to think about settling all of these cases, and not just some of them."

Johnson & Johnson did not offer Kraft's client "a penny" throughout the trial, he said.

Shawn Johnson said he was exposed to cancer-causing asbestos through his work and use of talcum powder from 1980 to 2010. Johnson was diagnosed with mesothelioma in December 2019, and his lawsuit said he continues to endure physical pain, suffering, mental anguish, loss of earnings, earning capacity and attendant medical expenses, all to the plaintiffs' general and special damage in excess of the jurisdictional limits of the unlimited court.

J&J failed to safely manufacture its talcum powder products and subsequently failed to warn consumers of their potential exposure to asbestos through use of the powder, the complaint alleged. Shawn Johnson v. Johnson & Johnson, 20STCV17335. (L.A. Sup. Ct., filed May 5, 2020).