BALTIMORE — A Baltimore jury awarded over $1.5 billion in damages to a Maryland woman who alleged in a lawsuit that Johnson & Johnson’s talc-based personal care products caused her to develop cancer. But the sizeable award “is far from final,” an attorney said.

The company, which has been ordered to pay billions in other baby powder-related litigation, has vowed to appeal the jury’s verdict in favor of Maryland resident Cherie Craft, who was diagnosed with mesothelioma in 2024. The jury awarded Craft $1.5 billion in punitive damages from J&J and a subsidiary, as well as over $59.8 million in compensatory damages for medical expenses, lost earnings and other harms.

The verdict was “believed to be the largest ever returned against Johnson & Johnson for a single plaintiff,” Craft’s legal team at Dallas-based Dean Omar Branham Shirley LLP said in a news release.

Craft’s lawyers said in a 105-page complaint that the White Plains resident was diagnosed with peritoneal malignant mesothelioma after decades of using talcum powder products that they alleged exposed her to asbestos. The jury found that J&J and three related entities fraudulently misrepresented or concealed information about the safety of its baby powder, and that their “fraud/deceit was a substantial factor in causing” Craft’s mesothelioma.

Peritoneal mesothelioma is a cancer that develops in the lining of the abdomen and is linked to asbestos exposure. Though J&J insists that the talc baby powder doesn’t cause cancer, the company stopped using talc in its baby powder in 2023 and instead uses cornstarch.

Craft “used Johnson’s Baby Powder every day of her life until she was diagnosed with cancer,” Jessica Dean, one of her attorneys, said in a Monday statement. She called Craft’s cancer “preventable.” Craft could not be reached for comment on Wednesday.

“J&J refused to accept any responsibility and fought at every turn,” Dean said.

In a Tuesday statement, J&J called the verdict “egregious” and “patently unconstitutional,” vowing to “immediately appeal” it.

“These lawsuits are predicated on ‘junk science,’ ” Erik Haas, the company’s worldwide vice president of litigation, said in a statement. He said that decades of studies have shown that J&J’s talc products are safe and do not contain asbestos. The verdict, he said, was a result of “gross errors” made by the court that allowed Craft’s legal team “to pervade the record with improper and prejudicial statements and assertions.”

Colin Ram, a Charleston, South Carolina-based attorney who has represented pharmaceutical companies in civil litigation and now has his own private practice, said J&J has consistently challenged talc verdicts via post-trial motions and appeals, sometimes resulting in substantial damage awards being reduced.

What ultimately gets paid, he said, “is often decided years later and can look very different from the headline number.”

In some cases, the plaintiffs “end up negotiating a lower payout in exchange for avoiding more litigation” after trial, said Monica Washington Rothbaum, chief operating officer and senior attorney at J&Y Law, a personal injury firm in Los Angeles.

She said that while the jury could be trying to send a strong message, “the final outcome usually comes down to a long legal review, a process of negotiation, and sometimes insolvency if the company can’t afford to pay up.”

_____

©2025 The Baltimore Sun. Visit at baltimoresun.com. Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.