Notice Issued To New Jersey Bar On Talcum Multicounty Litigation

The Administrative Office of the New Jersey Courts posted a notice seeking comment from the New Jersey bar as to the motion to transfer talcum powder lawsuits pending against Johnson & Johnson into multicounty litigation.

Monday, September 21, 2015 - A notice to the New Jersey bar was issued by the Acting Administrative Director of the Courts Glenn A. Grant to submit comments on the pending motion for consolidation of talcum powder lawsuits in multicounty court. The notice gave one month for attorneys to comment on the filing of the motion to transfer the lawsuits, which focus on the allegations that Johnson & Johnson did not act responsibly in warning consumers or reacting to research regarding the risk of ovarian cancer posed by the regular use of talc product by women.

The notice references the "Revised Multicountry Litigation Guidelines" as the focus for potential comments to be submitted by attorneys concerned with the multicounty litigation filing initially made by the defendants, namely Johnson & Johnson. The notice included the application proposing the motion to transfer submitted by the defendants to the Administrative Office of the Courts.

The initial motion to transfer the lawsuits into multicounty litigation requested that the talcum powder cases filed against Johnson & Johnson be moved to the Atlantic City Superior Court before Judge Nelson C. Johnson. The plaintiffs responded to the motion to transfer filed by the defendants be suggesting that the lawsuits be transferred to the Middlesex County Court before Judge Jessica R. Mayer instead of Johnson & Johnson's original choice, claiming that the Middlesex court's lighter case load would benefit the efficiency of the multicounty litigation. The Middlesex County Court had 2,000 less cases on their docket than the Atlantic City Superior Court at the time of the plaintiff's request.

The lawsuits being considered for multicounty litigation revolve around the allegations made by plaintiffs that Johnson & Johnson's talcum powder products have been linked to an increased risk in developing ovarian cancer in women when used regularly over lengthy periods of time. A number of talcum powder research studies have published work relating to the link between continued use of talcum powder and the chance of a woman contracting ovarian cancer, with many putting the increased risk close to 30 percent.

Plaintiffs are claiming that Johnson & Johnson failed to warn customers of the possible link between their Baby Powder and Shower to Shower talcum powder products and the risk of the development of ovarian cancer. Attorneys for the plaintiffs have produced decades of studies demonstrating the link between talcum powder and the development of ovarian cancer and claim that the presence of those studies should have been sufficient cause for Johnson & Johnson to warn consumers about the possible dangers of their talcum products. The allegations also claim that Johnson & Johnson may have known about the connections and chose not to warn customers intentionally in hopes of protecting profits made from their talcum powder products.

The multicounty litigation is expected to be transferred as both the plaintiffs and defendant support the consolidation of the lawsuits before a single state judge. The remaining variables include the location of the proceedings and which judge the lawsuits will be consolidated before. Decisions are expected to be made on those fronts before the end of the calendar year.

Information provided by TalcumPowderCancerLawsuit.com, a website devoted to providing news about talcum powder ovarian cancer lawsuits, as well as medical research and findings.