After about a day of deliberation, a Boston jury returned a $42 million verdict for a couple who claimed Johnson & Johnson’s baby powder directly caused one of them to contract mesothelioma.
The jury awarded Paul Lovell $15 million for past pain and suffering, $9 million for future pain and suffering, $608,300 for past medical expenses and $2 million for future medical expenses. The jury awarded his wife, Kathryn Lovell, $5 million for past loss of consortium and $11 million for future loss of consortium. The couple has been married for 45 years and used Johnson & Johnson’s baby powder on themselves and their four children. They have lived in the same home in Melrose, Massachusetts, for decades.
“This verdict is not just about Paul Lovell. It’s about every consumer who was told these products were safe,” Dean Omar Branham Shirley partner Aaron Chapman said in a news release. “For years, Johnson & Johnson ignored its own internal warnings and scientific evidence about the presence of asbestos in its talc. The jury has sent a strong message: Corporate misconduct will not be tolerated.”
Dallas-based Chapman and Dean Omar Branham Shirley of counsel Danny Kraft represented the couple. During the two-week trial, they told the jury Johnson & Johnson concealed the health risks associated with their products for years.
“Paul never worked in a factory, never used joint compound, and never had any occupational exposure to asbestos. Instead, like untold millions of Americans, he was a lifelong user of J&J’s Baby Powder,” Kraft said in a news release. “He trusted the product on himself and on his children.”
The jury found the company’s actions amounted to negligence and breach of warranty.
For Paul’s damages, they requested the jury for about $25 million, and for Kathryn, they asked between $16 and $24 million.
Chapman said Johnson & Johnson’s lawyers told the jury Paul’s very rare genetic fusion was the driver of his mesothelioma instead of the asbestos.
“Digging into that and understanding that, and showing the jury that, while he may have had that that’s not the driver of the disease, or at the very least, the asbestos was also a substantial factor in the causing of this disease, was probably the toughest hurdle,” Chapman told The Texas Lawbook. “We’re very grateful the jury saw it our way.”
Erik Haas, worldwide vice president of litigation at Johnson & Johnson said the company will appeal the verdict.
“This decision is predicated on ‘junk science’ that is refuted by decades of studies demonstrating Johnson’s Baby Powder is safe, does not contain asbestos and does not cause cancer. The plaintiff lawyers’ business model is to roll the dice in search of jackpot verdicts, fueled by litigation-funded junk science, without regard to the fact that most claimants recover nothing in the tort system,” Hass said in a statement to The Lawbook. “These talc lawsuits clog courts and impose extraordinary costs on the judicial system with contrived ‘scientific’ debates that should be presented to and decided by the scientific agencies authorized by Congress to evaluate such questions. This is why the Company continues to expose the plaintiff’s bar and their so-called experts through affirmative litigation.”
New York-based Kirkland & Ellis partner Morty Dubin did not immediately respond to requests for comment.
Massachusetts-based Thornton Law Firm partner Leslie-Anne Taylor also represented the plaintiffs.
The lawsuit was filed in Middlesex County Superior Court in Massachusetts.
This is not the first time Dean Omar Branham Shirley has won a case against Johnson & Johnson in Boston over its baby powder. Just last month, the firm secured an $8 million jury verdict.
The case is Paul Lovell and Kathryn Lovell v. Johnson & Johnson, 21-2086.
Correction: An earlier version of this story mischaracterized which plaintiffs had mesothelioma.