Johnson & Johnson’s Safety Claims Cited in Mesothelioma Victim’s Lawsuit
Ashley Johnson filed a personal injury lawsuit against Johnson & Johnson after being diagnosed with malignant epithelioid mesothelioma. With no history of occupational or environmental exposure to asbestos, she pointed to her regular and prolonged use of the company’s talcum powder products as the source of her illness. The company asked the court to dismiss her charge of nonconformity to an express warranty, arguing that they’d never warranted the product, but the judge hearing the case agreed with the victim that the terms the company referred to as “marketing” did imply a warranty.
Mesothelioma Victim Says She Relied on J&J’s Promises of Purity and Safety
The mesothelioma victim’s claim against Johnson & Johnson and its subsidiary LTL management accused the company of a construction/composition defect in its product, nonconformity to express warranty, failure to warn, and design defects. In its defense, Johnson & Johnson filed a motion to dismiss the charges, but the district judge hearing the case only agreed with the company on one of its arguments.
In response to Johnson & Johnson’s argument that she hadn’t met the standard required to accuse them of a construction/composition defect, Ms. Johnson agreed, and the claim was dismissed. But when the company argued that they’d made no express warranty about their product, she pushed back. She produced evidence of the company’s advertisements of being “safe” and “pure” and said that she had relied on those statements when deciding on what product to use on herself and her children.
Judge Agrees with Mesothelioma Victim that J&J Advertising Went Beyond Opinion or Praise
Ms. Johnson produced additional advertisements from the company, including descriptions of a “strict 5-level safety process, ensuring every ingredient is safe for use” and others including “backed by science,” “clinically proven,” and “purity of its ingredients.” She asserts that those were express warranties that induced her to use the Johnson & Johnson’s talc powders she says caused her mesothelioma.
In his decision, the judge agreed with the mesothelioma victim, explaining the company’s advertisements and references to safety, purity, and science went beyond being a general opinion or praise and represented an expressed warranty. The charges against the consumer giant will remain and the case will move forward.
Paquete de compensación financiera GRATUITO
- Información sobre despachos de abogados que recuperarán su INDEMNIZACIÓN MÁS ALTA
- Aprenda cómo cobrar en 90 días
- Solicite su parte de $30 mil millones en fondos fiduciarios
