ARTICLE
5 March 2020

Johnson & Johnson Hit With Punitive Damages Verdict In New Jersey

CC
Clyde & Co

Contributor

Clyde & Co is a leading, sector-focused global law firm with 415 partners, 2200 legal professionals and 3800 staff in over 50 offices and associated offices on six continents. The firm specialises in the sectors that move, build and power our connected world and the insurance that underpins it, namely: transport, infrastructure, energy, trade & commodities and insurance. With a strong focus on developed and emerging markets, the firm is one of the fastest growing law firms in the world with ambitious plans for further growth.
A jury in New Brunswick, NJ ordered Johnson & Johnson to pay punitive damages in connection with a consolidated trial of four plaintiffs with talc exposure claims.
United States Litigation, Mediation & Arbitration

A jury in New Brunswick, NJ ordered Johnson & Johnson to pay punitive damages in connection with a consolidated trial of four plaintiffs with talc exposure claims.

A jury in New Brunswick, NJ ordered Johnson & Johnson to pay $750,000,000 in punitive damages in connection with a consolidated trial of four plaintiffs claiming to have developed mesothelioma as a result of using talc powder products contaminated with asbestos fibers. These cases had been tried to verdict on liability in September 2019 – that portion of the trial resulted in a combined compensatory damages verdict of almost $40,000,000 and was notable for Johnson & Johnson's entire summation being stricken from the record as inappropriate. The punitive damages verdict was subsequently reduced to $186,000,000 by the trial judge in accordance with New Jersey law limiting punitive damages verdicts to no more than five times a compensatory damages verdict in the same case. Johnson & Johnson's CEO Alex Gorsky was compelled to testify in the punitive damages phase of this trial with respect to statements he had made regarding the company's knowledge of talc-related hazards and his sale of stock in the company following a Reuters article detailing the company's alleged internal knowledge of such hazards.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

See More Popular Content From

Mondaq uses cookies on this website. By using our website you agree to our use of cookies as set out in our Privacy Policy.

Learn More