Johnson & Johnson Medical Monitoring Lawsuit: Talc Victims Demand Preventative Care

Johnson & Johnson (J&J) faces another legal challenge over its talc-based baby powder. This lawsuit differs from previous ones, as plaintiffs are seeking not only damages for those allegedly harmed by the product, but also medical monitoring for long-term users who haven't been diagnosed with cancer.

Specifically, the lawsuit is demanding preventative and diagnostic care for ovarian, fallopian tube, and peritoneal cancer for women who used the powder for more than four years. Allegations claim J&J knew of potential dangers as early as the 1970s but continued to market and sell the powder despite it being “defective, dangerous to human health, unfit and unsuitable to be advertised, marketed, and sold in the United States, and lacked proper warnings associated with their use.”

This new lawsuit raises further questions about the safety of J&J's baby powder and the company's responsibility to consumers, pointing to how the company’s conduct has reportedly caused many women to die, and many more will die in the future because of it, the lawsuit alleges.

Women Demand Medical Monitoring for Cancer Risk After Years of Talc Use

Joni S. Bynum, Robin Coburn, and James Coburn initiated the proposed class action lawsuit against J&J on behalf of all women in the United States who have used J&J's baby powder for over four years. The trio claims that prolonged use of the product increases the risk of developing epithelial ovarian cancer, fallopian tube cancer, and primary peritoneal cancer. 

These cancers often require specialized diagnostic testing and preventative measures not typically offered to the general public. The plaintiffs argue that J&J failed to adequately warn consumers about these risks, potentially delaying diagnosis and treatment for many women.

They are seeking both the monitoring, and damages for those both diagnosed and undiagnosed with cancer associated with talc exposure. In August 2023, Robin Coburn was diagnosed with serous fallopian tube cancer after using the baby powder for years. She, and her husband James Coburn, are seeking compensatory and punitive damages for her developing the disease. 

Bynum has not been diagnosed with a disease, but argues she is at increased risk of developing one due to prolonged exposure to the baby powder and is therefore in need of medical monitoring. If she is diagnosed with cancer, she argues that J&J should be on the hook for paying for her treatment.

The class action lawsuit argues that women “suffered (or will in the future suffer) bodily injury resulting in pain and suffering, disability, disfigurement, mental anguish, loss of capacity of the enjoyment of life, shortened life expectancy, expenses for hospitalization, medical and nursing treatment, loss of earnings, loss of ability to earn, funeral expenses and death” due to J&J’s actions. 

J&J has continually denied that its products were dangerous to use, or could cause cancer. In 2022, after mounting legal action against the company, it announced it would switch from using talcum powder in its baby powders to using corn starch.

J&J Disputes Motives Behind Latest Talc Lawsuit

In response to the latest lawsuit, J&J's Worldwide Vice President of Litigation Erik Haas told Reuters the "meritless" lawsuit had been brought by the plaintiffs’ lawyers, who are also involved in a number of other cases against J&J, in an effort to stop the company’s most recent bankruptcy plan. 

Haas said they did that because they would get a higher amount in fees if they pursued the lawsuits outside of the bankruptcy. "The plaintiff firms should cease the obstructionist behavior, and let their clients decide for themselves whether to accept the pending offer," he stated.

However, the plaintiffs lawyers shot back at that allegation, saying the real issue is that the bankruptcy plan wouldn’t properly cover their clients for the harm they suffered and are at risk of suffering. A lawyer for the plaintiffs, Chris Tisi, said the “inadequate funding” in the bankruptcy plan "doesn't realistically address the needs of women who could develop ovarian cancer in the future because of past baby powder use."

The lawsuit states that J&J “is one of the world’s largest and most financially stable corporations, with a market capitalization of approximately $350 billion, a credit rating better than that of the United States, and approximately $30 billion in liquid assets.”

J&J's Bankruptcy Strategy Challenged as Inadequate for Victims

J&J is on its third attempt at filing for bankruptcy to bring an end to the litigation it is facing from more than 60,000 plaintiffs. In this latest attempt, it has created shell companies to absorb talc-related liabilities and then declare bankruptcy for these entities. 

As part of the latest strategy, known as the "Texas two-step," J&J is offering a $6.48 billion settlement to victims of ovarian cancer as part of the bankruptcy filing, which would end the litigation in 99 percent of talc related lawsuits against the company. Victims have been given a three month voting period to decide whether the bankruptcy should be allowed to proceed.

While the lawyers for some victims have expressed satisfaction with the deal, Reuters reports, others, including those behind a lawsuit against the proposal, say it is an illegal cop out undertaken solely to protect the company’s assets. 

In this latest talcum powder cancer lawsuit, the plaintiffs are suing J&J for alleged fraud, negligence, failure to warn, breach of warranties, defective manufacture and design, violation of consumer protection laws, fraudulent concealment, civil conspiracy, loss of consortium, wrongful death, and more. 

Case Details

• Lawsuit: Bynum et al. v. LLT Management LLC F/K/A LTL Management, LLC et al. 
• Case Number: 3:24-cv-07065
• Court: U.S. District Court District Of New Jersey

Plaintiffs' Attorneys: 

• Richard Golomb and Kevin Fay (Anapol Weiss)
• Christopher Tisi and Mike Papantonio (Levin Papantonio Rafferty Proctor Buchanan O’Brien Barr Mougey, P.A.)
• P. Leigh O’Dell, Andy Birchfield, Jr., Ted G. Meadows, and David B. Byrne, III (Beasley Allen Crow Methvin Portis & Miles, P.C.)
• Michelle A. Parfitt (Ashcraft & Gerel, LLP) 
• Warren Burns, Amanda Klevorn, and Natalie Earles (Burns Charest LLP)
• Laurence S. Berman (Levin Sedran & Berman, LLP)