BOSTON — A jury in Massachusetts has ordered Johnson & Johnson to pay over $42 million to the family of Paul Lovell, ruling that the company’s baby powder was responsible for his mesothelioma diagnosis. Lovell, who used the product for four decades on himself and his children, received his diagnosis in 2021.
This verdict marks one of the largest awards in a series of talc-related lawsuits against the corporation, highlighting the rising legal scrutiny surrounding claims of asbestos-laden talcum powder. During the two-week trial, Lovell’s attorneys pointed out that he had no history of occupational exposure to asbestos, emphasizing that his only exposure was through the baby powder, which the jury found was contaminated with asbestos. The jury also concluded that the company had been negligent, failing to disclose evidence of contamination and neglecting to warn consumers for many years.
“Paul did not work in a factory or use substances associated with higher risks for asbestos exposure,” said attorney Danny Kraft. “He was simply a lifelong user of Johnson & Johnson’s Baby Powder, trusting it for himself and his children.”
Attorney Aaron Chapman echoed this sentiment, stating that the verdict was significant not only for Lovell but for all consumers misled about the safety of the product. “For years, Johnson & Johnson ignored internal warnings and scientific evidence regarding asbestos in its talc,” he said, adding that the jury’s decision sends a clear message against corporate negligence.
In response, Johnson & Johnson has maintained that its talc products do not contain asbestos and are not carcinogenic. Erik Haas, the company’s Vice President of Global Litigation, denounced the jury’s decision as a result of what he called “junk science,” and announced plans to appeal, asserting that the plaintiffs’ attorneys were simply seeking large payouts in a flawed tort system.
J&J is currently facing over 63,000 lawsuits from individuals alleging damage from its talcum powder, as mounting evidence suggests the products may have exposed consumers to toxic asbestos. This trial follows other significant jury awards against the company, including a recent $8 million verdict for Janice Paluzzi, who also developed mesothelioma after using J&J products believed to be safe.
In Paluzzi’s case, her attorneys argued she had no other known sources of asbestos exposure, and jurors concluded that J&J had been negligent in ensuring the safety of its products. The jury determined that its talc was indeed contaminated and that J&J had breached its warranty of safety to consumers.
The ongoing legal challenges for Johnson & Johnson have become increasingly complex. Efforts to resolve numerous talc claims through bankruptcy court have failed, forcing the company to address individual lawsuits across various state and federal courts. Following the rejection of its bankruptcy attempt in March 2025, J&J has reverted to focusing on litigation, reversing approximately $7 billion previously set aside for settlements.
As the legal landscape continues to shift, the company’s liabilities may grow as more cases proceed to trial. Both consumers and legal analysts are closely monitoring the outcomes, as past verdicts indicate a troubling trend for the company amid a rising tide of asbestos-related claims.
This article was automatically written by Open AI, and the people, facts, circumstances, and story may be inaccurate. Any article can be requested for removal, retraction, or correction by writing an email to contact@publiclawlibrary.org.