Judge Overturns $260M J&J Mesothelioma Talc Verdict
Legislation & Litigation
Written by Travis Rodgers | Edited By Amy Edel
A new trial is being ordered in Oregon after a judge overturned a jury’s $260 million mesothelioma verdict against Johnson & Johnson. Judge Katharine von Ter Stegge of the Oregon 4th Judicial District Circuit Court granted J&J’s motion. Judge von Ter Stegge will soon release a written statement explaining her decision.
Plaintiff Kyung Lee plans to appeal the judge’s decision. Trey Branham, a lawyer representing Lee said, “While we respect the court and its ruling, we also disagree.”
In 2023, Lee filed a lawsuit against J&J after receiving a mesothelioma diagnosis. Her lawsuit claims the company’s talcum powder she used for more than 30 years was contaminated with asbestos.
Lee says her mother began using the talc-based baby powder on her when she was a baby. The plaintiff notes she also continued using the product as an adult.
During the trial, a lawyer representing defendant J&J claimed asbestos at a nearby factory caused Lee’s diagnosis. Erik Haas, J&J’s worldwide vice president of litigation, claims the original verdict was “the direct result of numerous egregious errors committed by the plaintiff’s lawyers” and had “no basis in the law or science.”
J&J Legal Issues
Kyung Lee is one of more than 62,000 plaintiffs with pending lawsuits against J&J over claims asbestos-contaminated talc within its products cause cancer. The majority of plaintiffs were diagnosed with ovarian cancer.
While J&J continues to argue its products weren’t contaminated with asbestos, the company recently added $1.1 billion to its $6.475 billion proposed talc settlement. If approved, J&J will pay nearly $8 billion over more than 25 years. However, the proposed settlement won’t affect outstanding mesothelioma talc lawsuits.
The proposal would allow J&J to create a subsidiary to absorb the legal claims and then declare bankruptcy. This strategy is known as the Texas two-step. This would be J&J’s third attempt at filing for bankruptcy.
Legal Battle Between Plaintiffs’ Law Firms
A group of plaintiffs’ attorneys opposed to J&J’s proposed Texas two-step maneuver filed a lawsuit to try to prevent it. Stemming from that litigation back and forth, a new legal battle is brewing between the firms themselves.
Plaintiff firm Beasley, Allen, Crow, Methvin, Portis & Miles led the opposition to J&J’s settlement strategy. The firm has now filed a lawsuit against firms it had previously been working with, The Smith Law Firm and Porter & Malouf. Beasley Allen alleges the two law firms are breaking a joint venture agreement to represent 11,000 plaintiffs in J&J asbestos litigation.
Beasley Allen’s filed complaint states: “The financial problems of Defendants Smith and Smith Law have now grown to the point that they are actively undercutting Beasley Allen in settlement negotiations with Johnson & Johnson in an effort to get a settlement that would alleviate their financial problems, but which would not in Beasley Allen’s opinion be in the best interest of the joint venture clients.”
The complaint also alleges: “Defendants Smith Law and Porter Malouf have also failed to comply with their obligation under the JV Agreement to pay 50% of the expenses on a quarterly basis. Defendants Smith Law and Porter Malouf have failed to make all quarterly expense reconciliation payments to Beasley Allen since the third quarter of 2023 and currently owe Beasley Allen $1,164,841.09 for their half of expenses which have been invoiced but not paid.” Attorney Allen Smith of The Smith Law Firm reportedly asserts the claims are “baseless.” He also characterized the suit as “petty tactics” on the part of Beasley Allen.
