Jun 2017 — After a U.S. Supreme Court ruling Monday, Circuit Judge Rex Burlison declared a mistrial in the latest talcum powder case in St. Louis Circuit Court. This was the sixth case in St. Louis against defendants Johnson & Johnson and Imerys Talc America. Plaintiffs represent the estates of three women who died from ovarian cancer following long-term genital applications of talcum powder.
The Supreme Court ruling involved cases filed against pharmaceutical company Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. over injuries allegedly caused by its blood thinner Plavix. The cases were filed in California. The Supreme Court ruled that state courts are limited in their authority to hear claims against companies that are not based in the state when the alleged injuries did not occur there.
Attorneys representing the plaintiffs will continue their efforts. Plaintiffs in the St. Louis talc trial include two from out of state and one man from Webster Groves, Missouri.
“It’s not the venue that makes it difficult for Johnson & Johnson and Imerys to win these trials, it’s the facts,” says Beasley Allen lawyer Ted Meadows. “After reviewing this morning’s Supreme Court ruling, and based on evidence and statements now in the record, we believe this litigation can go forward in Missouri courts. We plan to conduct additional discovery and depositions to confirm this position and look forward to that opportunity. Our trial team remains confident that the evidence and the science remains on the side of our clients. We’re prepared to file these cases in courts across the nation should that be necessary, and believe that jurors will continue to carefully consider the clear link between talcum powder use and ovarian cancer.”
Monday’s Supreme Court ruling overturns an earlier ruling by the California Supreme Court. Justice Sonia Sotomayor offered the lone dissent, saying the decision will make it more difficult for individual plaintiffs to access the courts. Sotomayor wrote of the decision, “It will make it impossible to bring a nationwide mass action in state court against defendants who are ‘at home’ in different states. And it will result in piecemeal litigation and the bifurcation of claims.”
* * *
For more information or to schedule an interview with an attorney, contact our Media & Press team, at [email protected].