While recent juries have delivered significant verdicts against Johnson & Johnson in talc cases nationwide, particularly for ovarian cancer and mesothelioma claims, trial and appellate courts have been scrutinizing the largest payouts - mainly punitive damages tied to allegations of corporate misconduct.
With tens of thousands of claims still pending and Johnson & Johnson returning to the tort system to fight after failed bankruptcy efforts, the direction of the litigation -- including potential global resolution -- remains uncertain.
For more than a decade, Johnson & Johnson has defended against thousands of lawsuits by
plaintiffs who allege its talc-based products, including Baby Powder and Shower to Shower, caused ovarian cancer and mesothelioma, in part due to alleged asbestos contamination.
"Our position has never wavered: Our talc products are safe, do not contain asbestos and do not cause cancer," company litigation president Erik Haas said in a statement, as another bellwether trial was set to start Monday in Los Angeles.
Despite what the company describes as some "major wins" in the litigation at both the trial and appellate levels, a string of recent juries have found Johnson & Johnson at fault.
In 2023, Johnson & Johnson discontinued its talc-based powders in favor of a cornstarch formula. In statements, the company said the move was driven by commercial factors and not related to product safety.
However, plaintiffs have argued the move supports their claims that Johnson & Johnson was aware of the potential risks tied to its talc products.
Over the past year, juries in multiple jurisdictions have returned substantial awards to plaintiffs who alleged the company's talc-based powders caused their cancer. Those verdicts have ranged from a $40 million ovarian cancer award to two bellwether plaintiffs in Los Angeles to a $1.5 billion mesothelioma verdict in Baltimore, both of which the company has appealed.
At the same time, courts have significantly shaped these outcomes through post-trial rulings.
In March, Los Angeles County Superior Court Judge Theresa M. Traber upheld the $40 million award and rejected Johnson & Johnson's post-trial challenges in the coordinated ovarian cancer proceeding. Johnson & Johnson Talcum Powder Cases,
JCCP4872 (L.A. Super. Ct., filed Aug. 2, 2016).
In a separate mesothelioma case, Los Angeles County Superior Court Judge Ruth Ann Kwan eliminated a $950 million punitive award from a $966 million jury verdict after finding the plaintiffs had not presented clear and convincing evidence of malice needed to sustain such a penalty. Moore v. Johnson & Johnson et al., 21STCV05513 (L.A. Super. Ct., filed Feb. 9, 2021).
Other jurisdictions have recently produced mixed results, including defense wins and more modest plaintiff awards, such as a $250,000 ovarian cancer verdict in Philadelphia this year and a 2024 ovarian cancer defense verdict in Florida.
Attorneys involved in the litigation, as well as others following the cases, say the recent wave of verdicts reflects a broader shift as more cases reach juries after years of procedural delays.
Between 2021 and 2024, Johnson & Johnson attempted to resolve the litigation through a strategy known as the "Texas Two-Step," moving its talc-related liabilities into a newly created subsidiary that then filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy.
In bankruptcy filings, the company said the approach was meant to resolve claims in a single, court-supervised process and create a trust to compensate current and future plaintiffs, though critics argued it was designed to limit liability. Bankruptcy courts rejected the strategy.
"I think what we're starting to see is a lot more momentum being gained in that juries across the country are finally getting to see the story of what Johnson & Johnson did, what they knew specifically about the risks and hazards of its baby powder," Wisner Baum LLP partner Ari S. Friedman said. "And I think the verdicts are reflecting that." Friedman, along with attorneys at Robinson Calcagnie Inc. and Beasley Allen Law Firm, represent bellwether plaintiffs in the coordinated ovarian cancer proceeding in Los Angeles, where the next trial in an initial group of test cases is scheduled to begin Monday.
He pointed to internal company documents introduced at trial, which plaintiffs have used to argue Johnson & Johnson had long-standing knowledge of potential risks associated with its talc products.
"It's Johnson & Johnson's own voice telling the jury ... we knew this was a problem, we continued to sell it anyway," Friedman said.
However, the company has sharply disputed that characterization, arguing the claims are not supported by reliable scientific evidence.
"The plaintiff bar has built its case on false narratives and junk science, chasing runaway verdicts at the expense of the truth," Haas said in a statement, adding that Johnson & Johnson has filed lawsuits against some plaintiff experts "who have authored fraudulent articles falsely claiming that talc causes cancer."
Robinson Calcagnie partner Daniel S. Robinson, who co-led last year's $40 million plaintiffs' verdict and is co-leading the upcoming trial, said earlier outcomes in the ovarian cancer litigation - including an overturned $417 million Los Angeles verdict in 2017 - continue to inform how plaintiffs' attorneys approach the cases.
"I think some of the earlier verdicts were taken away because of jurisdictional reasons... but I still view those as plaintiff wins because the jury found liability and made factual determinations based on the evidence," Robinson said.
"That said, we have a very savvy and sophisticated litigation team on the other side, and we need to do everything we can to avoid creating appellate issues that can be used against us."
Johnson & Johnson is defended in the litigation by a national trial team led by Kirkland & Ellis LLP.
Munley Law partner J. Christopher Munley, a personal injury attorney in Pennsylvania who is not involved in the talc litigation against Johnson & Johnson, described recent verdicts as "signposts" rather than turning points, opining that while some awards have been substantial, the results are too varied across jurisdictions.
"Verdicts have come down that lawyers would call 'bell ringers,' and J&J knows they have a problem. ... But it hasn't all gone in plaintiffs' favor," Munley said.
He added that differences in state court procedures, evidentiary rules and jury composition have contributed to that variability.
The tension between those perspectives underscores a central question in the litigation: whether the accumulation of verdicts will ultimately push Johnson & Johnson toward a global resolution or reinforce its strategy of continuing to litigate the cases individually.
After its third bankruptcy effort was rejected in 2025, Johnson & Johnson said it would shift its focus back to defending the cases in court. "We prevailed in 16 of 17 ovarian cases over the last 11 years and will devote our efforts to defeating those
claims," Haas said in a statement.
Friedman said that continued trial wins, particularly those involving punitive damages, reflect juries' strongest findings about corporate conduct and risk. But he acknowledged that those verdicts have not yet translated into meaningful settlement
discussions.
Munley similarly pointed to the company's long-term litigation strategy, describing bankruptcy filings and other procedural moves as part of a broader effort to manage exposure over time.
"It's a maneuver that is pervasive in big manufacturing litigation," Munley said. "The defendants try all types of legal maneuvers to escape accountability, and they use every opportunity they can find within the legal system to do it."
At the same time, Munley said those strategies can also function as delay tactics, allowing companies to extend litigation timelines while limiting immediate payouts.
"They play the long game, and many times plaintiffs can't afford to play the long game," Munley said.
Robinson said the litigation is gaining traction again following years of delay tied to the bankruptcy proceedings.
"I believe the lawyers on the plaintiffs' bar are focused and working cooperatively to prevail justice for these 70,000 women who filed cases suffering talc ovarian cancer," he said.
