Dr. Jacqueline Moline is a highly respected researcher and noted expert on the subject of mesotelioma maligno. She is frequently called upon for expert witness testimony in asbestos exposure lawsuits. Recently, she was named in a suit filed by Johnson & Johnson’s subsidiary LTL Management: the suit called her writings fraudulent and libelous, but New York federal judge Georgette Castner dismissed their claim, saying there was no proof that her conclusions were “verifiably false” and noting that they were protected under her free speech rights.
Talc Companies Object to Mesothelioma Researcher’s Conclusions
At issue in Johnson & Johnson’s caso against the occupational medicine researcher was a paper she authored that linked asbestos-contaminated talcum powder products to mesothelioma. The company, which is facing over 61,000 lawsuits from people diagnosed with ovarian cancer and malignant mesothelioma, sued four researchers, attacking their studies and calling Dr. Moline’s work false advertising.
The paper that the company’s subsidiary LTL Management objected to discussed the connection between exposure to asbestos-contaminated talcum powder and enfermedades relacionadas con el amianto, including malignant mesothelioma. The suit focused on five of the people who had been included in her study who may have been exposed to asbestos from sources other than the talc. But the judge rejected this argument
Judge Calls Mesothelioma Researcher’s Conclusions “Tentative”
In dismissing the claim against Dr. Moline, Judge Caster pointed out that the mesothelioma researcher had specifically identified her research as “tentative scientific conclusions” rather than unequivocal statements of fact. The judge also criticized the consumer giant’s assertion that it was problematic for the researcher to both publish scientific studies and participate as an expert witness in asbestos cases, noting that the research had specifically referenced that aspect of her professional work.
Finally, the judge referenced the First Amendment’s protection of free speech and said that Dr. Moline’s publication of her asbestos research fell into that category. Johnson & Johnson has pledged to appeal the judge’s decision in the case.
