Quantcast

Johnson & Johnson defense attorneys challenge plaintiff researcher’s cancer fiber no-show in Northern California trial

NORTHERN CALIFORNIA RECORD

Saturday, December 21, 2024

Johnson & Johnson defense attorneys challenge plaintiff researcher’s cancer fiber no-show in Northern California trial

Asbestos
Microscope

Pexels

Attorneys defending Johnson & Johnson in a trial to determine if a man’s mesothelioma cancer was caused by baby powder on Thursday again sought to emphasize that a tissue sample taken from plaintiff Anthony Valadez had revealed no asbestos fibers.

“You didn’t find asbestos,” said Allison Brown, attorney for Johnson & Johnson.

“I didn’t find it with the limited amount (tissue) I had to work with,” responded plaintiff's expert, Dr. Ronald Dodson, a University of Texas biological and microscopic researcher.

This exchange took place after Dodson told Joseph Satterley, Valadez’s attorney, that Valadez had been a heavy user of the J&J baby powder.

The trial in the Alameda Superior Court is being streamed live courtesy of Courtroom View Network.

All this week the trial sessions were conducted remotely via the internet and not in the courtroom after one of the participants tested positive for the COVID virus.

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.

J&J subsidiary LTL, in bankruptcy in New Jersey, proposed to pay approximately $9 billion to settle the litigation. 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.

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.

Even if Valadez wins in court an awarding of damages would not be made until the current bankruptcy process is brought to a conclusion.

Dodson told jurors he was asked by attorneys to evaluate Valadez’s pathological and surgical reports. He told Satterley that talc had been found adjacent to the mesothelioma in the plaintiff’s body.

Satterley exhibited a graphic that showed that chrysotile, one of several forms of asbestos, had been detected in a bottle of baby powder acquired “off the shelf.” Prior testimony stated that unlike other forms of asbestos, chrysotile can damage cell DNA quickly within a few months and then become “engulfed” by protective white blood cells in the body and escape detection.

“Does each exposure to asbestos increase the risk?” Satterley asked.

“The more (asbestos) you get the more chance of disease,” Dodson said.

“Has it been demonstrated that asbestos particles can be transferred into the lymphatic system?”

“Yes.”

“If there are no (fibers) found in the tissue, does that mean there is not increased risk?”

“No. It means that what I looked at I didn’t find any,” Dodson said.

Earlier in the week, Dr. David Egilman, an occupational health researcher and plaintiff witness, had also said the tissue sample’s small size was a flaw in making a judgment, and that fibers not visible did not mean Valadez hadn’t been exposed to asbestos.

Defense attorneys stuck to their theme that no visible fibers showed nothing and that other possible exposure to asbestos the plaintiff lawyers had neglected to consider. Valadez’s step-father had worked around asbestos as a handyman at housing job sites and Anthony Valadez had attended school in an old building.    

“You never met Anthony Valadez,” Brown said.

“I have not,” Dodson responded.

“Met the family?”

“I have not.”

“You’re not a treating physician.”

“That’s correct.”

Dodson conceded there were medical records in the case he had not seen.

“You didn’t do an investigation of where Valadez went to school?”

“No.”

“Where he worked at Home Depot (Merced)?”

“No,” Dodson responded. “I just saw a deposition.”

“You’ve been working with lawyer firms since the 1980s,” Brown said.

“Correct.”

“For Mr. Satterley?”

“Yes.”

“Mr. Satterley is paying you $800 per hour.”

“That’s my rate.”

“You’ve made over a million dollars.”

Dodson agreed.

Brown asked Dodson about a declaration he had signed in May 2022 provided to plaintiff lawyers stating that Valadez’s exposure to asbestos was the likely cause of his mesothelioma. She said at the time Valadez had not yet given a taped deposition in the case nor had his mother and it was before the tissue analysis.

“I had looked at a portion of a pathology report,” Dodson responded.  

“You were relying on lawyers that it was only baby powder,” Brown said. “Asbestos fibers can remain in the body for decades.”

“Sure,” Dodson responded.

Instead of pointy and elongated asbestos particles, Valadez’s tissue sample revealed particles of silica, titanium, talc powder, mica, and 167 particles of iron.

“The iron was not inhaled,” Brown said. “The iron came from Valadez’s own body. It did not come from anything he inhaled.”

“It’s a by-product of dying cells in the (cancer) area,” Dodson said.

ORGANIZATIONS IN THIS STORY

More News