- Tentative deal exceeds J&J’s $400 million set-aside for cases
- More than 40 states probing whether powder risks were hidden
The settlement would avert potential lawsuits alleging that J&J hid any links between the talc in its powder and various cancers, according to the people, who asked not to be named because the pact isn’t yet public. They said J&J and representatives for state attorneys general are still hammering out the specific terms of the accord but have reached an agreement on the approximate total amount.
The settlement is part of J&J’s
Shares of J&J fell slightly as trading began Monday morning in New York, but closed with a 0.25% gain at $161.53. The stock fell 11% last year.
$9 Billion Offer
The New Brunswick, New Jersey-based company had offered to settle all current and future baby powder claims for
J&J spokeswoman Clare Boyle had no immediate comment on the settlement Monday. Kylie Mason, a spokesperson for Florida AG
So far, only
The pact doesn’t cover the suits by Mississippi and New Mexico, which want to negotiate higher settlements since they have already begun litigating, the people said. Mississippi, for example, wants J&J punished for selling more than 6 million bottles of baby powder in the state without a cancer warning over almost 50 years starting in 1974, according to court filings. That could result in about $6 billion in damages if a judge hands down a $1,000-per-bottle fine under the state’s law.
Broad Exposure
J&J, the world’s largest maker of health care products, has legal exposure far beyond the states’ claims. It faces more than
J&J maintains that its talc-based products don’t cause cancer and that it has marketed its baby powder appropriately for more than a century. The company has won a number of cases in court and had other suits dismissed before trial.
Former baby powder users contend that J&J executives knew since the early 1970s that the product contained trace amounts of asbestos. Since 2014 at least a dozen juries have awarded a total of more than $6.5 billion in damages to consumers blaming the powders for their cancers, according to data compiled by Bloomberg News. Some of those awards later were reduced or thrown out on appeal.
The company pulled its talc-based powders off the market in the US and Canada in 2020, citing slipping sales. J&J replaced talc with a cornstarch-based version of the product and vowed to remove all its baby powders containing talcum powder worldwide by the end of last year.
The consolidated federal case is In Re Johnson & Johnson Talcum Powder Products Marketing, Sales Practices and Products Liability Litigation, 16-md-2738, US District Court, District of New Jersey (Trenton).
(Updates with Florida AG spokesperson’s comment in sixth paragraph)
--With assistance from
To contact the reporter on this story:
To contact the editors responsible for this story:
Peter Jeffrey, Steve Stroth
© 2024 Bloomberg L.P. All rights reserved. Used with permission.
Learn more about Bloomberg Law or Log In to keep reading:
See Breaking News in Context
Bloomberg Law provides trusted coverage of current events enhanced with legal analysis.
Already a subscriber?
Log in to keep reading or access research tools and resources.