Johnson & Johnson’s Libel Lawsuit Against Occupational Health Expert Dismissed

Johnson & Johnson (J&J) is facing billions of dollars of potential liability due to claims its talc baby powder was contaminated by asbestos and caused ovarian cancer and mesothelioma. One way the company is trying to strike back is to sue an occupational expert whose research showed a link between powder use and mesothelioma for libel. A New Jersey federal court dismissed the case on July 1.

Defamation is a legal term for a damaging, false statement that injures a company’s or another person’s reputation or character. Libel is defamation in written form.

Dr. Jacqueline Moline, the chair of occupational medicine at Northwell Health, was sued by a J&J subsidiary, LTL Management. It was created to shield J&J from talc lawsuits as part of its so-far unsuccessful efforts to force case settlements in bankruptcy court. Moline published a paper that linked talc-based consumer products to mesothelioma, according to Reuters.

J&J is being sued by more than 61,000 plaintiffs who claim its talc-containing baby powder caused ovarian cancer or mesothelioma. The company has won and lost baby powder cases and has made a $6.48 billion proposal to resolve current and future lawsuits.

Federal Judge Finds No Wrongdoing

U.S. District Judge Georgette Castner dismissed the case because the court found Dr. Moline’s research was neither fraudulent nor libelous. LTL is also suing three other scientists who performed research on the relationship between cancer, talc powder, and asbestos. Their cases are ongoing.

The company claims its talc products are safe, aren’t contaminated with asbestos, and don’t cause cancer.

Judge Castner ruled that Dr. Moline didn’t engage in libel, fraud, or false advertising when she published her research in 2020. Moline’s conclusions were protected by free speech rights under the U.S. Constitution’s First Amendment, and J&J failed to show that her underlying research was “verifiably false.”

Plaintiff Alleges False Research Paper Harmed It

LTL’s lawsuit alleged:

• Moline’s paper was false because it stated that 33 individuals with no known asbestos exposure other than talc product use were involved
• J&J claimed she knew that at least five study participants were exposed to asbestos through cigarette filters and building materials
• Moline “made a career” being paid to testify as an expert for plaintiffs’ lawyers in asbestos cases, appearing in more than 200 talc cases and testifying at 16 trials

Judge Castner stated in his decision:

• Moline may not have been persuaded by evidence of other asbestos exposure if she knew about it
• She indicated her research was “tentative scientific conclusions, not unequivocal statements of fact”
• J&J had not established Moline made a “verifiably false statement” when she stated participants had “no known asbestos exposure other than cosmetic talcum powder”
• She disclosed her expert witness work in her paper, listing it as a potential conflict of interest
• Moline issued a correction after the paper’s publication to show one participant was exposed to asbestos from cigarette filters

Erik Haas, J&J’s global vice president of litigation, stated the company will appeal the ruling.