Two Talcum Powder Cases Removed To Federal Court By Johnson & Johnson

A pair of lawsuits claiming a link between talcum powder and the plaintiffs' development of ovarian cancer have been transferred to federal court after a May 20 filing of a notice for removal by the defendants.

Monday, November 9, 2015 - Two talcum powder cases pending against Johnson & Johnson claiming the company failed to warn customers about an alleged link between talcum powder and ovarian cancer have been removed to from state to federal court via a notice of removal filed by the lead attorney representing the defendants. Claiming that the diversity of citizenship in the state court existed for the relevant cases, Johnson & Johnson filed the notice of removal on May 20 and the cases were transferred from the Circuit Court of Madison County to the U.S. District Court in the Southern District of Illinois.

The plaintiffs whose cases are being removed filed suit against Johnson & Johnson for the company's failure to warn consumers about the alleged link between their talcum powder product and ovarian cancer. Both plaintiffs used talcum powder in a manner consistent with the findings presented that lead to an increase in the risk of ovarian cancer for more than 30 years, and both allegedly developed ovarian cancer because of their continued use of talcum powder. The plaintiffs named Johnson & Johnson's Baby Powder and Shower-To-Shower as the products responsible for their contraction of ovarian cancer.

The plaintiffs presented studies dating back to as far as 1971 referencing talcum powder research demonstrating the link between ovarian cancer and talcum powder. One of the studies presented, completed in 1982, found that talcum powder led to a 92 percent increase in the risk for developing ovarian cancer. More than 20 studies linking talcum powder to ovarian cancer have been conducted overall, and on the power of this evidence the plaintiffs whose cases are being removed are seeking combined damages in excess of $400,000.

According to the notice of removal, the cases being transferred to federal court were moved in a timely manner under removal jurisdiction and the punitive damages pursued by the plaintiffs exceeded $75,000, qualifying them for removal to federal court. In removing the cases, Johnson & Johnson only transfers the cases named from state to federal court and does not waive any of the claims made against them by the plaintiffs.

The defendant claims that complete diversity of citizenship has been fulfilled in the state case and Johnson & Johnson, a New Jersey company, does not run its primary business out of Illinois where the cases were originally filed. The defendants claimed in their notice for removal that the plaintiffs included Walgreens in their baby powder lawsuits in an attempt to keep the defendants from trying the cases in a federal forum.

In supporting their claim that the inclusion of Walgreens was fraudulent, Johnson & Johnson argued that Walgreens was not culpable in regards to the allegations made connection talcum powder to ovarian cancer. Instead, the retailer only offered shelf space for the sale of consumer products. Though the plaintiffs claimed Walgreens bore responsibility for selling the product, the notice of removal referenced a similar case in which the lawsuit was removed to federal court after offering the same argument

The two cases will be transferred to federal court, where the defendants preferred to have these talcum powder lawsuits heard. Attorney Madeleine McDonough filed the notice of removal on behalf of Johnson & Johnson.

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