A California judge has reversed a jury ruling against Johnson & Johnson in a lawsuit associating ovarian cancer to talcum powder, according to a Bloomberg report.
Jurors in August ordered the New Brunswick, N.J.-based company to pay $417 million to 63-year-old Eva Echeverria, who used the company's talcum-based baby powder more than 50 years and developed ovarian cancer. Ms. Echeverria has since died.
But Judge Maren Nelson, with the Superior Court of Los Angeles County in California, reversed the $417 million talc trial, Johnson & Johnson said via email.
Specifically, the company said Judge Nelson granted its motions "for judgment notwithstanding the verdict" as well as "our motions for new trial, as to both Johnson & Johnson (the parent company) and Johnson & Johnson Consumer Inc. (the subsidiary that actually manufactures and markets Johnson's Baby Powder)."
"The Court is of the firm view that Yessain's [plaintiff's expert on specific causation] 'ruling out' of age and ovulatory cycles, amounted to no more than speculation. Her testimony that it was 'probable' the cause of the cancer was unknown, but then putting a 'less than 50 percent chance' on same (with no reasoning) likewise amounted to mere speculation," the judge wrote in her ruling. "Those facts show that the expert did not properly employ the methodology she espoused and independent of the fact that there was no evidence of substance to rule talc 'in,' persuade the court that JNOV must be granted to JCCI and Johnson & Johnson on the basis that no specific causation was shown."
The company said this means the judge ruled in favor of Johnson & Johnson, and the judge's ruling would have to be reversed by an appellate court for a new trial to take place.
In response to the ruling, Johnson & Johnson issued the following statement: "We are pleased with Judge Maren Nelson's ruling. Ovarian cancer is a devastating disease — but it is not caused by the cosmetic-grade talc we have used in Johnson's Baby Powder for decades. The science is clear and we will continue to defend the safety of Johnson's Baby Powder as we prepare for additional [similar] trials in the U.S."
Mark Robinson, who represents Ms. Echeverria's case, told Bloomberg he planned to appeal Friday's decision.
"We disagree with the court’s decision," he said in an email to the publication. "A jury of Ms. Echeverria's peers found the Johnson & Johnson defendants liable. We will ask the appellate court to uphold this jury's verdict. We will continue to fight on behalf of all women who have been impacted by this dangerous product."
Friday's ruling comes about a week after the Missouri Eastern District appeals court tossed a $72M award in a separate Johnson & Johnson baby powder case.