Talcum Powder Litigation Report
Hot on the heels of separate $72 million and $55 million verdicts entered against Johnson & Johnson defendants, HarrisMartin has launched this Talcum Powder Litigation Report, an online-only resource dedicated solely to news on talc-based powder ovarian cancer claims.
SEARCH THE ARCHIVES
Issue #07, October 2016
Plaintiffs with talcum powder claims pending in Washington, D.C., have opposed recent efforts to dismiss the claims under the Anti-SLAPP Act, maintaining that the Personal Care Products Council’s activities and statement do not fall under the protection of the Act.
A Missouri state court overseeing what is the third talcum powder trial in the state has denied the Johnson & Johnson defendants’ motion for a directed verdict at the close of the plaintiffs’ case, according to the court’s docket.
The parties involved in a recently dismissed talcum powder case have appealed the court’s decision, sources told HarrisMartin, and are awaiting a briefing schedule from the state’s Appellate Division.
Plaintiffs with talcum powder claims pending in a Missouri state court have moved to de-designate certain documents as confidential, maintaining that the “protected documents” do not contain any secret formulas, trade secrets, products still in design or competition strategies “such that if disclosed Imerys would suffer irreparable harm.”
A growing number of plaintiffs have moved to vacate conditional transfer orders effectively moving their claims to the recently created talcum powder multidistrict litigation docket, with some maintaining that their claims don’t belong in federal court at all.
The judge selected to preside over the federal multidistrict litigation docket established for claims related to the use of Johnson & Johnson talcum powder products has set an in-person organizational conference for next month in order to address the various motions and other “housekeeping” issues in the individual cases.
Plaintiffs in a recently removed talcum powder lawsuit have asked a Missouri federal court to stay the proceedings pending a determination on a forthcoming motion to remand, saying that court should not weigh in on subject-matter jurisdiction prior to determining the “propriety of removal.”
Johnson & Johnson has asked a Missouri state court to reconsider its ruling denying a motion to stay a talcum powder lawsuit, according to a recent docket entry.
Johnson & Johnson defendants’ attempts to reverse a $55 million verdict entered in the second talcum powder lawsuit to proceed to trial in St. Louis has been docketed in the Missouri Court of Appeals.
The Missouri state court overseeing what is the third talcum powder trial in the state has denied renewed defense efforts for a mistrial and to transfer venue, according to the court’s online docket.