A court-appointed special master in New Jersey has recommended that plaintiffs be allowed to present expert witness testimony in the mass tort litigation against Johnson & Johnson. This recommendation represents a significant setback for the company’s defense against tens of thousands of claims linking its products to health complications.
Court recommendation details Retired U.S. District Judge Freda Wolfson, in a comprehensive 658-page filing, stated that epidemiological data demonstrates a statistically significant association between genital talc use and ovarian cancer. She concluded that the methodologies employed by the plaintiffs’ experts are scientifically reliable. This recommendation effectively allows approximately 67,500 consolidated lawsuits in New Jersey to move forward toward trial.
Stakeholder responses
-
Johnson & Johnson: The company’s legal chief announced plans to appeal the decision, arguing that it relies on flawed reasoning and fails to apply updated federal rules regarding the admissibility of expert opinions. J&J maintains that its talc products are safe and asbestos-free.
-
The Plaintiffs: Legal representatives hailed the decision as a major victory for the thousands of women affected, criticizing the corporation’s long-standing strategy of obstruction and delay.
Financial and legal context While J&J has successfully defended many individual cases in the past, it has recently sustained several high-profile losses. Notably, a Baltimore jury recently ordered the company to pay $1.56 billion to a single plaintiff, the largest award ever in the history of this litigation. J&J has since transitioned its global product line away from talc, opting instead for cornstarch-based alternatives.