A trial in Alameda County in which a man claims his mesothelioma was caused by exposure to Johnson & Johnson baby powder opened on Wednesday with plaintiff attorneys saying it’s a deadly carcinogen.
Defense attorneys countered that its product is harmless and the plaintiff’s cancer so rare it could not be caused by a product used by millions of people.
Joseph Satterley, attorney for plaintiff Anthony ‘Emory’ Valadez, exhibited a photo that showed Valadez sitting up leaning forward in bed propped by a pillow.
“This is the only way he can sleep to not have the pain,” Satterley said during opening arguments.
The trial expected to take six weeks in the Alameda Superior Court in Oakland is being streamed live courtesy of Courtroom View Network.
Valadez is suing Johnson & Johnson and other corporations, including retailers Safeway and Target, plus LTL Management Company claiming exposure to talc powder for 23 years between 1998 and 2022 caused his mesothelioma, a rare cancer of the linings of the lungs.
Valadez has pericardial mesothelioma, the rarest of three types of the disease. The other two are pleural and peritoneal mesothelioma.
Johnson & Johnson has faced 40,000 lawsuits across the country in recent years over its talcum powder. It discontinued selling talc worldwide in 2023 in favor of corn starch which scientists claim is safe.
According to Reuters, J&J subsidiary LTL, in bankruptcy in New Jersey, proposed to pay approximately $9 billion to settle the lawsuits. A federal appeals court threw out an earlier attempt by the company to settle claims in bankruptcy and legal actions against the company had been stopped. However, a U.S. Bankruptcy Court allowed the Alameda proceeding to be held because Valadez is only expected to live a short time. Even if he wins a judgment the bankruptcy proceedings would forestall for the time being any collection of damages.
The outcome of the Alameda trial could impact other plaintiffs coming forward to join a settlement. Plaintiffs have been trying to get the bankruptcy process revoked.
Satterley, of the Oakland-based Kazan Satterley & Greenwood law firm, said Valadez’s cancer is terminal.
“I doubt he will live out the summer,” Satterley said. “These companies are responsible.”
Satterley said the J&J talcum powder contained needle-shaped asbestos fibers that are breathed in reaching the lungs and after a latency period that can take years causes the mesothelioma. He said J&J was invested in the image it had for over 100 years and the public trust it developed as a powder safe for mothers and babies.
“They (J&J) wanted to maintain the image of the mother-baby brand (baby powder),” Satterley said. “They referred to the powder as ‘our flagship.’”
Satterley said J&J corporate spokesman John Hopkins called the powder product a “cornerstone of the franchise.” It had also been referred to as a “sacred cash cow.”
“There is no known safe level of exposure to asbestos and Johnson & Johnson will never say there was a misuse of their product,” Satterley said.
Satterley said the two sources of talc, a mined mineral in which rocks are crushed into powder, came from Vermont and later China.
“It’s the shape and chemistry (asbestos fibers) that pierce into the body’s cells and cause the cancer,” he said. “These fibers are pointy and very small.”
Labeled an amphibole group, the minerals include chrysotile, amosite, anthophylitte, crocidolite, tremolite and actinolite
Satterley said the fibers migrate into the body’s pleura and lymphatic system and take up position in the linings of the lungs.
“Mesothelioma is a signature of asbestos and you can’t see it, taste it or smell it,” he said.
Satterley said Johnson & Johnson chose not to do an epidemiological study of the product despite the knowledge they had exposed millions of people to asbestos.
“They had a safe alternative corn starch and they knew about it for years,” he said. “This lawsuit only allows for damages. I can’t put J&J officials in jail and I’m not trying to.”
Satterley indicated that he was obligated to see that his client who is only 24 years old with a terminal disease gets justice.
“This was a preventable cancer,” he said. “They (J&J) knew it before he (Valadez) was born.”
Defense attorney Allison Brown with the New York-based Skadden law firm told the jury Satterley had said a lot of bad things and made serious allegations against the company.
“It’s easy to point a finger at a big corporation,” she said. “A lot of people don’t like big corporations we know it.”
She asked the jury to judge the case on the evidence and the facts.
Brown said the company had done exhaustive testing of mines to make sure their cosmetic talc product was of the highest and purest quality, and asbestos free.
“Our product didn’t cause this rare disease and we stand up to the truth,” she said. “There is nothing to take away the pain of Mr. Valadez and his family and your hearts will break, ours too. But hundreds of millions of people have used the product. We don’t make a lot of money (on baby powder) we were losing money. It’s important, we want our customers to trust us.”
Brown said it doesn’t make sense for a company with such a long history of producing and selling the powder (since 1894) and the efforts it has made testing it to attempt to hide asbestos.
She exhibited a graphic that showed that out of 300 million people in the U.S., 300 people each year get mesothelioma. Out of that number 10 to 15 contract the type that Valadez has.
Brown also displayed a chart showing that ship and construction industry workers had higher or elevated risks for exposure to asbestos, but barbers who work with cosmetic talc like the baby powder showed no increased risk.
Brown said there is no known connection between Valadez’s type of cancer and asbestos exposure.
“The available evidence is not sufficient,” she said.
Brown surmised that given its long latency period from exposure to onset of illness, Valadez’s exposure would have to have begun at a very young age. An additional chart showed a spike in asbestos use in 1965 and a sharp dip from the 1990s on.
Brown called Johnson & Johnson’s efforts to look for asbestos in human tissue samples “herculean” in nature.
She noted that asbestos in low amounts can be found almost everywhere including in ambient air to be breathed (not considered dangerous), and that in the case of Valadez a cell going bad was a far more likely reason for his disease.
“Cancer can develop without an environmental carcinogen,” she said. “A mistake in the genes and your body can’t fix it.”
Brown said plaintiff expert witness researchers had repeatedly failed to find asbestos in samples in testing and finally after additional attempts found a handful of particles in one test whose results she questioned.
She also questioned the pre-trial testimony of the plaintiff’s mother who said she had purchased the baby powder in Monterey or San Francisco at a Safeway because there was no Safeway in Merced where the family lived.
“Why would someone drive 101 miles one-way (Monterey) to purchase baby powder?” Brown asked.
Brown said company officials had surpassed the legal requirements to ensure the safety of the product by engaging independent labs and third parties to do additional testing.
“Why would we go above and beyond at enormous expense to us if we were trying to hide something?” she asked.
Judge Richard Seabolt is presiding.