A group of seven California plaintiffs recently signaled their intention to a federal court to refile their talcum powder asbestos cancer lawsuit against pharmaceutical and cosmetics giant Johnson & Johnson in order to include additional defendants who may be at fault for causing their asbestos-related conditions. The federal district court judge hearing the case granted plaintiffs their motion to dismiss the case and include plaintiffs such as Claire’s and Valeant Pharmaceuticals over those companies’ negligence for not placing appropriate warning labels on their products.
The plaintiffs sought the request after the judge hearing the case disallowed the group to make any further amendments to the complaint originally filed only against Johnson & Johnson over claims that it negligently marketed its talc-based products such as Baby Powder and Shower to Shower. The plaintiffs originally filed their complaint in U.S. District Court for the Central District of California, claiming that the group developed serious, asbestos-related medical conditions as a result of using Johnson & Johnson’s talc products.
The judge hearing the case allowed the group to dismiss their claims, without prejudice, with the added condition that they pay for the legal fees incurred by Johnson & Johnson in the first iteration of the lawsuit. However, the judge cautioned Johnson & Johnson against “overlawyering” in an attempt to inflate the costs of the case as a retaliatory measure against the plaintiffs. The federal judge himself will decide the total amount of legal fees owed to Johnson & Johnson.