CVN screenshot of Dr. David Kessler, a pediatrician and former FDA commissioner who was the plaintiffs' first witness after Thursday's opening statements concluded
Los Angeles, CA - A highly anticipated bellwether trial finally began Thursday with opening statements in California state court in a closely watched case over claims Johnson & Johnson’s talc powder causes ovarian cancer, and the full trial is being webcast gavel-to-gavel by Courtroom View Network.
Aside from just one previous trial in 2017 (also recorded by CVN), this trial marks the first time a California jury hears claims supposedly linking talc exposure to ovarian cancer. Numerous California juries have returned verdicts in trials involving mesothelioma supposedly linked to inhaling asbestos in talc-based products, but this case is considered a key test for how jurors in 2025 react to claims from women who used talc-based products on their bodies versus inhaling it.
The two plaintiffs in the current case, a woman suffering from ovarian cancer and a man whose wife died from the disease, accuse J&J of knowing for years about possible asbestos contamination in their talc-products and potential links between talc itself and cancer but failing to warn consumers to protect sales of a highly popular brand. However J&J, which has secured multiple defense verdicts in talc mesothelioma and ovarian cases, insists these lawsuits are based on fundamentally flawed scientific conclusions.
Judge Theresa Trahber’s downtown Los Angeles courtroom was filled to capacity Thursday as both sides brought in small armies of attorneys and support staff given the high stakes in the case.
Representing plaintiffs Monica Kent and the husband of Deborah Schultz, attorney Andy Birchfield of Alabama-based Beasley Allen accused J&J during his opening statement of taking advantage of consumers by marketing Johnson’s Baby Powder (now cornstarch-based) specifically to new mothers, suggesting the product was safe even for infants.
Dan Robinson, of the California-based Robinson Calcagnie, argued J&J had internal knowledge about the potential health risks associated with talc but withheld them for the public during the same time Kent and Schultz were regularly using the product, insisting they “…would never have used Johnson’s baby powder knowing it had asbestos.”
For J&J’s opening statement the company turned to Kirkland & Ellis partner Allison Brown, a battle-tested talc trial veteran who has secured numerous defense verdicts in talc cases.
Brown repeated a theme heavily relied on by J&J in previous trials, stressing the studies linking talc to ovarian cancer and showing asbestos in Johnson’s Baby Powder amount to junk science, and that both plaintiffs’ cancer could be attributed to multiple factors other than talc exposure.
She characterized the ovarian cancer at issue as an extremely rare disease and suggested it would be vastly more common if talc powder actually caused it given the widespread use of the product. J&J has often cited the fact talc miners don’t show higher rates of cancer compared to the general population despite their vastly higher level of exposure to the mineral.
After opening statements concluded plaintiffs started off their case with testimony from Dr. David Kessler, a pediatrician who also served as Chief Science Officer of the White House COVID-19 Response Team from January 20, 2021 to May 2023.
The current trial is expected to last roughly four weeks and be immediately followed by additional trials. The outcome could have a significant impact on trials scheduled for 2026 in Pennsylvania and New Jersey state court, in addition to the first federal bellwether talc trial.
Meanwhile talc mesothelioma cases continue playing out around the country. A Florida jury recently returned a $20 million verdict in a trial recorded by CVN, and a trial in Oregon CVN planned to cover ended in a mistrial this week during jury selection.
Email David Siegel at dsiegel@cvn.com