Top 100 Trial Lawyers badge
BBB Accredited Business badge
Multi Million Dollar Advocates Forum badge
10 Best Attorney badge
top 10 trial lawyers badge
RUE Ratings Best Attorneys of aAmerica Badge
Veteran Approved Badge
Americas Top 100 Attorneys Badge
Lawyers of Distinction Badge
American Association for Justice Badge
Best Law Firms of America Badge
Top American Lawyers Badge
NADC Badge
Super Lawyers Badge

The outcome of one of the nation’s first talcum powder/mesothelioma trials could determine if Johnson & Johnson agrees to another massive settlement.

The trial, taking place amidst J&J’s ongoing efforts to settle thousands of talc-related ovarian cancer lawsuits, involves a male plaintiff who alleges he developed mesothelioma due to inhaling asbestos allegedly present in Johnson’s Baby Powder.

Evan Plotkin argues he developed mesothelioma in 2021 at the age of 64 after years of using talc-based cosmetic products, however J&J, which denies its talc products ever contained asbestos, maintains his mesothelioma likely did not develop from asbestos exposure but rather from a family medical history that supposedly made him more likely to get cancer.

For purposes of this article, the deceased mesothelioma victim in this case will be referred to as T.G.

In a recent court decision, a Chicago appeals court upheld a jury’s verdict against Johnson & Johnson (J&J), providing the deceased mesothelioma victim’s family with the deserved justice. Earlier this year, a Cook County court in Illinois ordered the giant pharmaceutical company to pay T.G.’s family $45 million in damages after T.G. died of malignant mesothelioma. J&J tried to secure a retrial, but the court of appeals stood firm and ensured the jury’s decision in favor of the late T.G.’s family remained intact.

T.G., who had six children, was diagnosed with malignant mesothelioma, a rare and aggressive form of cancer that occurs due to asbestos exposure. This illness most commonly affects the lining of the lungs. After T.G.’s death, her family filed a wrongful death lawsuit against J&J. According to the lawsuit, the source of the asbestos exposure that resulted in the death of T.G. was J&J’s talc-based product, which she used throughout her life. T.G. also used the product on her children. During the trial, the family’s legal representative presented evidence revealing that J&J’s talc-based product contained asbestos and the company knew about the dangers of this for years but failed to inform or warn the public, thus endangering the lives of millions of consumers, including T.G. and her children.

For purposes of this article, the mesothelioma victim in this article will be referred to as A.M.B. and her ex-husband, Mr. A.B.

In a recent court decision, a judge denied an asbestos company’s motion to dismiss the mesothelioma lawsuit and allowed the case to proceed. The tragic death of the mesothelioma victim, A.M.B., that occurred due to second-hand asbestos exposure draws attention to the dangers of this type of exposure. Second-hand asbestos exposure occurs when someone brings asbestos fibers home on clothing or other personal items, putting their family at risk. This indirect exposure can be just as dangerous as direct exposure.

After years of unknowingly inhaling asbestos fibers when washing her ex-husband’s clothing, A.M.B. developed malignant mesothelioma. Mr. A.B. had used DAP Inc.’s products in his home and hardware business. A.M.B.’s family filed a lawsuit against the company, alleging that their products were responsible for her illness. The company tried to dismiss the case by arguing that the plaintiffs had not established a link between A.M.B.’s illness and their products. The court denied the defendant’s motion.

For purposes of this article, the mesothelioma victim in this case will be referred to as T.C.

The Superior Court of Pennsylvania recently denied an asbestos company’s motion to overturn a mesothelioma verdict. T.C. was diagnosed with mesothelioma, a rare and deadly form of cancer, almost eight years ago, and over two years ago, a jury ordered his employer to pay his surviving loved ones $2.3 million in damages after concluding that the employer was liable for T.C.’s illness. Despite there being enough evidence to prove that the employer played a role in T.C.’s illness and the verdict, the employer sought to overturn the decision by filing a motion for a retrial or entry of a judgment in their favor. According to Lenox Instrument Company (employer), T.C.’s family had failed to prove its (the employer’s) role in his disease.

Mesothelioma is a rare, aggressive type of cancer that primarily affects the lungs, abdomen, or heart. This illness occurs after someone is exposed to asbestos, a fibrous mineral that was once widely used in construction, manufacturing, and other industries. When asbestos is left undisturbed, it does not pose any threat. However, when disturbed, asbestos releases tiny fibers into the air, which, when inhaled or ingested, can get stuck in the body, resulting in inflammation and cellular damage over time. This damage can eventually cause mesothelioma.

For purposes of this article, the mesothelioma victim in this case will be referred to as A.F.

In a recent court case, a New York County Supreme Court judge denied Burnham LLC’s request to dismiss a punitive damages claim in a mesothelioma lawsuit. A.F., a former worker, was exposed to asbestos through Burnham boilers and other asbestos-contaminated equipment. A.F. and his wife filed a lawsuit seeking compensation for compensatory and punitive damages from Burnham LLC. The defendants filed a motion to dismiss the claim for punitive damages, but that motion was denied.

After suffering mesothelioma, a victim can file a personal injury lawsuit and seek compensatory damages, which aim to make up for direct losses. Compensatory damages include medical expenses, lost wages, and pain and suffering. Mesothelioma victims’ spouses can also seek compensation for loss of companionship and support. In a mesothelioma claim, victims and their families can also seek punitive damages. Unlike compensatory damages, punitive damages are meant to punish the defendant for particularly reckless or harmful behavior. These damages are intended to send a message to others and warn them against acting in the same manner as the defendant.

For purposes of this article, the mesothelioma victim in this case will be referred to as H.C. and his wife as R.C.

In a recent court decision, an Allegheny County jury awarded a mesothelioma victim and his wife almost $4 million in damages. H.C. received a malignant mesothelioma diagnosis after working as a boilermaker for a long time. After his diagnosis, H.C. and his wife, R.C., filed a lawsuit against Foster Wheeler, his former employer. H.C. blamed Foster Wheeler for his mesothelioma. H.C. claimed that the company failed to protect workers from asbestos exposure, leading to his illness. Mesothelioma is one of the illnesses that can develop after a person is exposed to asbestos. After listening to the case, the jury found Foster Wheeler liable for H.C.’s illness.

The jury learned that in the many years that H.C. was a boilermaker, he only worked for Foster Wheeler for ten weeks. Foster Wheeler provides engineering services, manufactures boilers, and services boilers across the U.S. and worldwide. Despite the existence of Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) regulations meant to prevent mesothelioma and other asbestos-related illnesses, Foster Wheeler did not comply with these regulations. Foster Wheeler’s legal representatives argued that other companies owned the site were responsible for ensuring workers were safe. However, the jury found that it was the defendant’s negligence that directly contributed to Mr. H.C.’s fatal illness.

Asbestos, a naturally occurring mineral once admired for its insulating and resistance properties, is widely known as a dangerous substance that can cause several illnesses, including mesothelioma. Despite the known dangers of asbestos, this substance was widely used in various industries, including oil refineries. While asbestos is no longer widely used, it still poses significant risks to oil refinery workers. In this article, we discuss asbestos exposure risks for oil refinery workers. Hopefully, the information in this article can help with the implementation of effective safety measures that can protect oil refinery workers and other workers from asbestos exposure.

Historical Use of Asbestos in Oil Refineries

Before the 1908s, asbestos use was prevalent in oil refineries due to its fire and heat-resistant properties. This resulted in many oil refinery workers getting exposed to asbestos and being put at risk of developing mesothelioma and other asbestos-related illnesses. Asbestos was commonly used in areas with particularly higher temperatures and pressures. Workers in certain areas of oil refineries, including boiler rooms, ovens, furnaces, and reactors, were at the greatest risk of asbestos exposure. Asbestos was used in various applications, including the following;

For purposes of this article, the mesothelioma victim in this case will be referred to as J.K.

In a recent court case, a Virginia jury awarded $3.45 million to the family of a deceased mesothelioma victim in a case against John Crane, Inc., a company known for manufacturing asbestos-contaminated products. The victim in this case, who will be referred to as J.K., died of malignant mesothelioma, a rare and aggressive form of cancer that is primarily caused by asbestos exposure in 2022. After his death, J.K.’s family filed a lawsuit against John Crane, Inc., alleging that J.K.’s occupational asbestos exposure occurred while he was working with asbestos-containing products made by the company. Recently, a jury hearing the case ruled in favor of J.K.’s family and held John Crane, Inc. responsible for its failure to adequately warn about the dangers of its products.

During the trial, jury members listened to details about J.K.’s career as a millwright. For around 18 years (between 1961 and 1979), J.K. was a millwright at a plant in Chesterfield County. While there, his responsibilities included repairing and maintaining equipment such as valves and pumps. Unfortunately, when carrying out his tasks, he unknowingly inhaled microscopic asbestos fibers, putting himself at risk of developing mesothelioma. The jury heard evidence that over time, the wear and tear of the parts that J.K. repaired and maintained caused asbestos fibers to break free, contaminating the air in the workplace.

Mesothelioma is a rare but aggressive form of cancer primarily caused by asbestos exposure. The prognosis of this illness is often poor. Many times, mesothelioma symptoms appear years after initial exposure. Because of this, mesothelioma is often diagnosed when it has advanced to later stages. Sadly, this means that many people die due to mesothelioma every year, leaving families devastated and facing significant financial burdens. However, for some families, it may be possible to file a wrongful death claim and seek compensation. A common question that families ask is, “What is the average wrongful death settlement for mesothelioma?”

What is Wrongful Death?

Not all families who lose their loved one due to mesothelioma can file a wrongful death claim and seek compensation. Only those whose loved one’s death was caused by another party’s negligence or misconduct are eligible to file a wrongful death claim. Often, wrongful death claims arise because companies failed to warn workers or consumers about the dangers of asbestos exposure. Manufacturers and contractors who fail to warn or protect people from the risks of asbestos exposure can also be held liable in wrongful death claims. Spouses, children, parents, other dependents, or the representative of a mesothelioma victim’s estate can file a wrongful death claim and seek various types of damages.

A significant legal victory was recently achieved when a federal judge dismissed a lawsuit filed by Johnson & Johnson (J&J) against a mesothelioma researcher. For long, mesothelioma victims have encountered challenges when trying to hold companies liable for their asbestos exposure. Many asbestos companies have defended themselves by challenging scientific evidence. Often, these companies argue that there is no conclusive proof that asbestos exposure causes mesothelioma. They focus on the methods and data and refuse to accept responsibility. Most recently, J&J filed a lawsuit against a mesothelioma scientist whose research suggests that talc-based consumer products can cause cancer. However, the judge dismissed the giant pharmaceutical company’s suit, emphasizing the researcher’s right to free speech. The judge also found no evidence to show that the researcher’s findings were false.

J&J has faced tens of thousands of lawsuits filed by victims of mesothelioma and ovarian cancer who used the company’s talc-based baby powder. The victims blame the talc-based baby powder for their asbestos exposure, which, in turn, caused their illnesses. The claimants argue that J&J failed to adequately warn consumers about the potential dangers associated with their product. In response to the lawsuits against them, J&J has employed several strategies, including creating a subsidiary, LLT Management, that proceeded to file for bankruptcy. The company has also filed lawsuits against researchers, including one prominent mesothelioma researcher, Dr. Jacqueline Moline.

Plaintiffs have presented internal J&J documents describing fears over the company’s talc’s connection to cancer. Despite this, the company still filed lawsuits against several researchers. Johnson & Johnson has not only attacked the researchers’ studies but has also accused one of the researchers, Dr. Jacqueline Moline, of libel, fraud, and false advertising in connection to the paper she published that connects asbestos-containing talcum powder products to mesothelioma.

Contact Information