Lifestyle
J&J must pay $19m to man who says its talc caused his cancer, jury finds
Johnson & Johnson must pay US$15 million (S$19.6 million) to a Connecticut man who alleges that he developed mesothelioma, a rare form of cancer, as a result of using the company's talc powder for decades, a jury found on Tuesday (Oct 15). Plaintiff
Johnson & Johnson must pay US$15 million (S$19.6 million) to a Connecticut man who alleges that he developed mesothelioma, a rare form of cancer, as a result of using the company's talc powder for decades, a jury found on Tuesday (Oct 15).
Plaintiff Evan Plotkin sued the company in 2021 soon after his diagnosis, saying he was sickened by inhaling J&J's baby powder.
The jury in Fairfield County, Connecticut Superior Court also found that the company should pay additional punitive damages, which will be determined later by the judge overseeing the case.
"Evan Plotkin and his trial team are thrilled that a jury once again decided to hold Johnson & Johnson accountable for their marketing and sale of a baby powder product that they knew contained asbestos," Ben Braly, a lawyer for Plotkin, said in an email.
Erik Haas, J&J's worldwide vice president of litigation, said in a statement that the company would appeal "erroneous" rulings by the trial judge that kept the jury from hearing critical facts about the case.
Plaintiff Evan Plotkin sued the company in 2021 soon after his diagnosis, saying he was sickened by inhaling J&J's baby powder.
The jury in Fairfield County, Connecticut Superior Court also found that the company should pay additional punitive damages, which will be determined later by the judge overseeing the case.
"Evan Plotkin and his trial team are thrilled that a jury once again decided to hold Johnson & Johnson accountable for their marketing and sale of a baby powder product that they knew contained asbestos," Ben Braly, a lawyer for Plotkin, said in an email.
Erik Haas, J&J's worldwide vice president of litigation, said in a statement that the company would appeal "erroneous" rulings by the trial judge that kept the jury from hearing critical facts about the case.