Baby Powder Class Action-Like Centralization Sought for Ovarian Cancer Lawsuits
With a growing number of women and families filing Baby Powder lawsuits and Shower-to-Shower lawsuits in courts throughout the U.S., each involving similar allegations that Johnson & Johnson failed to adequately warn about the risk of ovarian cancer associated with the talc-based powders, a request was filed last week to establish a federal multidistrict litigation (MDL) for centralized pretrial proceedings.
If the motion is granted, cases filed in U.S. District Courts nationwide will be transferred to one judge for coordinated discovery into common issues in the claims, which will allow plaintiffs to pool resources, as well as avoid inconsistent rulings from different courts.
While the process is often confused with a Baby Powder class action lawsuit, there are important differences for individuals with a claim to understand.
Talcum Powder MDL vs. Class Action Lawsuit
An MDL, or multidistrict litigation, is commonly established in the federal court system for complex product liability cases, where a large number of claims are filed by individuals who suffered similar injuries after using the same product. Although the process involves coordinated management during discovery and a series of early bellwether test cases, each claim remains an individual lawsuit throughout the process.
Unlike a class action, where all claims are tried through a class representative, each plaintiff will have the individual burden of establishing that their damages were caused by exposure to Johnson’s Baby Powder, Shower-to-Shower or another talcum powder product, and that Johnson & Johnson failed to provide adequate warnings about the cancer risk.
Since the circumstances surrounding the use of the talc-based products will be different in each case, and the nature of the damages caused by the ovarian cancer diagnosis will have a different impact on each plaintiff, the litigation cannot be resolved through a class representative.
Baby Powder Ovarian Cancer Lawyers Continuing to Review New Claims
The U.S. Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation will likely consider oral arguments on the motion during an upcoming hearing session scheduled for September 29 in Washington, D.C.
While the talcum powder litigation has rapidly grown in size and scope over the past few months, lawsuits over ovarian cancer from Johnson’s Baby Powder and Shower-to-Shower have been pending in various state court systems for years.
A handful of cases have already gone to trial at the state court level, resulting in multi-million dollar damage awards after evidence was presented about Johnson & Johnson’s failure to warn about the ovarian cancer risk. However, a growing number of cases are likely to be filed in the federal court system as more women and families learn about the link between a diagnosis of ovarian cancer and Baby Powder, Shower-to-Shower or another talcum powder product used for feminine hygiene purposes.
The injury lawyers at Saiontz & Kirk, P.A. are providing free consultations and claim evaluations for individuals nationwide to help determine if financial compensation may be available as a result of Johnson & Johnson’s apparent decision to withhold information and warnings from women nationwide.
All cases are reviewed under a contingency fee agreement, which means that there are no out-of-pocket costs to hire a lawyer and there are no attorneys fees or reimbursement of expenses unless we are successful obtaining a recovery for ovarian cancer suffered by you or a loved one.