The Johnson & Johnson talc lawsuits are a mass tort of more than 67,000 pending claims alleging that the company’s talc-based baby powder was contaminated with asbestos and caused ovarian cancer or mesothelioma. After three failed attempts to resolve the claims through bankruptcy, Johnson & Johnson is now defending the cases in federal and state courts, where juries in late 2025 and early 2026 have returned verdicts ranging from $250,000 to $1.5 billion. A pending ruling in the federal multidistrict litigation over whether plaintiffs’ scientific experts can testify is the next major turning point.
What Plaintiffs Are Claiming
The cases split into two groups. People diagnosed with mesothelioma, a cancer of the organ lining tied to asbestos exposure, allege the powder itself was contaminated. Women diagnosed with ovarian cancer after years of using talc powder for feminine hygiene make a parallel claim. In both, the core allegation is that Johnson & Johnson knew for decades its talc contained asbestos and hid that from consumers and regulators.1Reuters. Johnson & Johnson Knew for Decades That Asbestos Lurked in Its Baby Powder
Johnson & Johnson denies it. The company says its talc products are safe, contain no asbestos, and do not cause cancer, and it points to what it describes as thousands of independent tests supporting that position.
The science has moved. In July 2024, the International Agency for Research on Cancer reclassified talc as “probably carcinogenic to humans” (Group 2A), an upgrade from its earlier “possibly carcinogenic” rating. Talc that already contains asbestos has been rated a Group 1 carcinogen, the highest category, since 2009.2IARC. IARC Monographs Evaluate the Carcinogenicity of Talc and Acrylonitrile3IARC. Questions and Answers on IARC Monographs Volume 136
Why Bankruptcy Is No Longer an Option
Rather than face tens of thousands of trials, Johnson & Johnson tried three times to route its talc liabilities through Chapter 11 using a strategy known as the Texas Two-Step: move the claims into a newly created subsidiary, put that subsidiary into bankruptcy, and offer claimants a settlement fund. Each attempt failed.
The first two filings, both by a subsidiary called LTL Management, were thrown out because the subsidiary was not in genuine financial distress. The Third Circuit dismissed the first in January 2023, and a New Jersey bankruptcy judge dismissed the second in July 2023.4Drugwatch. Talcum Powder Settlements and Verdicts
The third attempt, filed in Texas in September 2024 through a new subsidiary called Red River Talc LLC, proposed a roughly $9 billion settlement. On March 31, 2025, Bankruptcy Judge Christopher López denied confirmation and dismissed the case. He found that law firms had cast ballots without proper client authorization, that tens of thousands of plaintiffs had insufficient time to vote, and that the plan included impermissible nonconsensual third-party releases that would have also shielded retailers and the Kenvue spinoff from future suits. Judge López wrote that “there is no real company or jobs to save here.”5Bailey Glasser. In Re Red River Talc LLC, Memorandum Decision and Order
Johnson & Johnson chose not to appeal and said it would defend the remaining claims in the tort system.6Asbestos.com. Judge Rejects J&J Settlement The U.S. Supreme Court’s June 2024 decision in Harrington v. Purdue Pharma, which held that the Bankruptcy Code does not authorize nonconsensual third-party releases, closes the door further on any similar future strategy.7CreditSights. U.S. Supreme Court Rejects Third-Party Releases
Recent Jury Verdicts
With the bankruptcy path closed, cases have gone in front of juries. The results have been uneven, and many awards are on appeal or already reduced.
- $1.5 billion, Baltimore (December 2025). A Baltimore jury awarded Cherie Craft, a 54-year-old diagnosed with peritoneal mesothelioma, $59.84 million in compensatory damages and $1.5 billion in punitive damages — $1 billion against Johnson & Johnson and $500 million against subsidiary Pecos River Talc. It is the largest single-plaintiff verdict in the talc litigation. The jury found the defendants had concealed asbestos contamination. Johnson & Johnson called the verdict “egregious and patently unconstitutional” and said it would appeal.8WYPR. Baltimore Woman Gets $1.5 Billion Verdict Award From J&J Baby Powder Suit9Mesothelioma.net. Baltimore Woman Awarded $1.5 Billion Mesothelioma Award in J&J Talc Case
- $65.5 million, Minnesota (December 2025). A Ramsey County jury awarded $65.5 million in compensatory damages to Anna Jean Houghton Carley, a 37-year-old mother of three with mesothelioma, who alleged childhood exposure to the baby powder. It was reported as the largest asbestos-related payout in Minnesota history.10Yahoo Finance. Minnesota Jury Delivers $65.5 Million Verdict Against Johnson & Johnson
- $966 million reduced to $16 million, Los Angeles (October 2025 / March 2026). A jury awarded the family of 88-year-old Mae K. Moore $16 million in compensatory damages and $950 million in punitive damages after finding Johnson & Johnson entirely responsible for her mesothelioma death. In March 2026, Superior Court Judge Ruth Kwan struck the punitive award, ruling the plaintiffs had not shown clear and convincing evidence of malice. Both sides are appealing.11Asbestos.com. Judge Disagrees With Jury, Overturns $950M J&J Punitive Award
- $250,000, Philadelphia (February 2026). A jury found Johnson & Johnson liable for the ovarian cancer death of Gayle Emerson, who used talc-based powders for feminine hygiene for more than 45 years, and awarded $50,000 in compensatory and $200,000 in punitive damages. The case was one of the first Philadelphia talc trials in a new mass tort program with more trials scheduled for 2026.12Androvett. Philadelphia Jury Returns $250,000 Verdict Against J&J in Latest Baby Powder Ovarian Cancer Trial
- $4.69 billion reduced to $2.11 billion, St. Louis (2018 / affirmed 2020). The earlier landmark verdict for 22 women and their families in an ovarian cancer case remains the largest talc award. A Missouri appellate court reduced it and called Johnson & Johnson’s conduct “reprehensible.” The Supreme Court declined to hear the company’s appeal in June 2021.13The Lanier Law Firm. Missouri Appellate Court Finds Reprehensible Conduct by J&J in $2.1 Billion Verdict
The Federal MDL and the Expert-Testimony Ruling
Most pending cases are consolidated in the federal multidistrict litigation, In re: Johnson & Johnson Talcum Powder Products Marketing, Sales Practices and Products Liability Litigation, MDL No. 2738, in the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey. It was established in 2016 and is currently overseen by Judge Michael A. Shipp. As of May 2026, roughly 67,623 plaintiffs have actions pending in the MDL.14CourtListener. In Re Johnson & Johnson Talcum Powder Products Marketing, Sales Practices and Products Liability Litigation15Motley Rice. Talcum Powder Lawsuit
The threshold question is whether plaintiffs’ scientific experts can tell juries that Johnson & Johnson talc is capable of causing ovarian cancer. Retired Judge Freda Wolfson, who led the MDL from 2016 to 2023 and now serves as a court-appointed special master, issued a 658-page report in January 2026 recommending that the experts be allowed to testify. She found the methods reliable and the link between genital talc use and ovarian cancer statistically significant.16Asbestos.com. Court-Appointed Expert’s Report Threatens J&J Talc Defense Judge Shipp has not yet ruled on whether to adopt the recommendation, and Johnson & Johnson has said it will file formal objections.
If Judge Shipp accepts the report, the first federal bellwether trial is expected to be Judkins v. Johnson & Johnson, an ovarian cancer case brought by a New Hampshire woman, and it could begin in the second half of 2026. Court-ordered mediation, requiring representatives with full settlement authority, began in September 2025.17Darrow. Johnson and Johnson Talc Lawsuit
How Kenvue Fits In
In 2023, Johnson & Johnson spun off its consumer health division as Kenvue, an independent public company that now owns the baby powder brand. Johnson & Johnson agreed to indemnify Kenvue for all baby powder liabilities in North America; Kenvue carries the liabilities elsewhere. Even so, Kenvue is regularly named as a co-defendant in U.S. cases. In the December 2025 Baltimore verdict, the jury found both companies liable for fraudulent concealment. In a 2024 Chicago mesothelioma case, a jury apportioned 70 percent of the $45 million award to Kenvue.18Claims Journal. J&J, Kenvue Hit With $1.5 Billion Talc Verdict19Insurance Journal. Kenvue Found 70% Responsible in $45M Talc Verdict Kenvue reports fewer than 2,000 claimants in the United Kingdom as of late 2025.20Kenvue. Statement on Behalf of Kenvue UK Limited on UK Talc Litigation
Where Things Stand Now
Johnson & Johnson has settled roughly 95 percent of the mesothelioma claims against it but still faces more than 60,000 ovarian cancer lawsuits. Bloomberg Intelligence analysts have estimated a comprehensive resolution could cost the company up to $11 billion, above the $9 billion Johnson & Johnson offered through the Red River bankruptcy.4Drugwatch. Talcum Powder Settlements and Verdicts
The near-term outcome turns on Judge Shipp. If he adopts the special master’s recommendation on expert testimony, federal bellwether trials could begin in the second half of 2026, the first in the MDL’s decade-long history. If mediation produces a global deal first, that would displace the trial track. Either way, Johnson & Johnson is appealing almost every large verdict, and some punitive awards have already been cut or wiped out by trial judges before an appeals court gets near them.16Asbestos.com. Court-Appointed Expert’s Report Threatens J&J Talc Defense