Search Results

To Listen to Audio click the Play Button [beneath each segment] which varies based on the browser you are using.

June 4, 2021

Title: Johnson & Johnson Talc Verdict
Topic: Johnson & Johnson Talc Verdict

Discussed by Kevin Parker
with Lanier Law Firm (www.LanierLawFirm.com)

After they lost in lower courts, Johnson & Johnson attempted a “hail Mary pass” by appealing to the US Supreme Court in hopes of reversing a huge monetary judgment. The US Supreme Court declined to hear the appeal.

Kevin Parker is an attorney with the Lanier Law Firm. Today he shares more details about the case, the verdict, and the decision from SCOTUS.

Click here  for more information

Questions/Issues Discussed:

During the trial phase, was it proven that asbestos causes cancer, including ovarian cancer? Was it also proven that Johnson & Johnson talcum powder had asbestos in it?

Was the trial jury presented with mountains of evidence that Johnson & Johnson was aware their talc mines had asbestos veins and that there was no way to keep the asbestos out of their products aimed at mothers and babies?

In 1976, did the cosmetics industry agree to make sure its talc products did not contain detectable amounts of asbestos?

For decades, did Johnson & Johnson obfuscate and hide the fact their products were dangerous and could cause cancer in woman?

Did Johnson & Johnson ghostwrite clinical studies that were used to mislead the FDA?

Was this all done for one purpose: to make more money?

Has Johnson & Johnson pulled its talcum powder products in US and Canadian markets, but not markets in India, Mexico, and other countries with weak product liability laws?

Are there thousands of US lawsuits pending against Johnson & Johnson by women who claim asbestos in their powder caused their cancer?

What will happen with these thousands of cases now that US Supreme Court has declined to take up the cases we have been discussing?

Do Conservatives love for companies to get big, hire lots of Americans, and make profits that benefit shareholders?

Should Conservatives find it reprehensible when corporations, big or small, knowingly cause great harm to the health and life of their customers and continue to do so to make more money?

More from this Guest      More on this Topic      More from this Organization