Minnesota Jury Delivers $65M Verdict in Cancer Lawsuit Against Johnson & Johnson

A Minnesota jury recently awarded $65.5 million to Anna Jean Houghton Carley, a mother of three, who alleged that talcum products manufactured by Johnson & Johnson exposed her to asbestos, leading to her diagnosis of cancer in the lining of her lungs.

At just 37 years old, Carley used Johnson & Johnson’s baby powder throughout her childhood, which she claims contributed to her development of mesothelioma, a severe cancer primarily linked to asbestos exposure. The jury’s decision highlights the ongoing concerns regarding the safety of talc-based products.

In response to the verdict, Johnson & Johnson announced plans to appeal. The company maintains that its baby powder is safe, free from asbestos, and does not cause cancer. Erik Haas, the worldwide vice president of litigation for Johnson & Johnson, expressed confidence that an appellate court will overturn the jury’s decision.

The trial, which lasted 13 days in Ramsey County District Court, focused on the claims made by Carley’s legal team. They argued that Johnson & Johnson knowingly sold and marketed talc-based products while being aware of the potential for asbestos contamination. Furthermore, they contended that Carley’s family was never informed of the risks associated with using the product on their child. Notably, the product was removed from U.S. shelves in 2020.

“This case was not about compensation only. It was about truth and accountability,” stated Carley’s attorney, Ben Braly. This sentiment underscores the broader implications of the case, which extend beyond financial restitution.

The verdict adds to a series of legal challenges faced by Johnson & Johnson regarding the safety of its talc products. The company has been embroiled in litigation over claims that its talc-based powders are linked to ovarian cancer and mesothelioma, a cancer that affects the lungs and other organs. In a significant move, Johnson & Johnson ceased the sale of talc-based powder globally in 2023.

Haas criticized the lawsuits, labeling them as based on “junk science” and asserting that decades of research have proven Johnson & Johnson’s Baby Powder to be safe, devoid of asbestos, and not a cause of cancer. This statement reflects the company’s ongoing defense against the allegations.

Earlier this month, another jury in Los Angeles awarded $40 million to two women who claimed that Johnson & Johnson’s talcum powder was responsible for their ovarian cancer. Additionally, in October, a California jury ordered the company to pay $966 million to the family of a woman who died from mesothelioma, asserting that her cancer was caused by asbestos contamination in the baby powder she used.

Copyright 2025 Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

A Minnesota jury recently awarded $65.5 million to Anna Jean Houghton Carley, a mother of three, who alleged that talcum products manufactured by Johnson & Johnson exposed her to asbestos, leading to her diagnosis of cancer in the lining of her lungs.

At just 37 years old, Carley used Johnson & Johnson’s baby powder throughout her childhood, which she claims contributed to her development of mesothelioma, a severe cancer primarily linked to asbestos exposure. The jury’s decision highlights the ongoing concerns regarding the safety of talc-based products.

In response to the verdict, Johnson & Johnson announced plans to appeal. The company maintains that its baby powder is safe, free from asbestos, and does not cause cancer. Erik Haas, the worldwide vice president of litigation for Johnson & Johnson, expressed confidence that an appellate court will overturn the jury’s decision.

The trial, which lasted 13 days in Ramsey County District Court, focused on the claims made by Carley’s legal team. They argued that Johnson & Johnson knowingly sold and marketed talc-based products while being aware of the potential for asbestos contamination. Furthermore, they contended that Carley’s family was never informed of the risks associated with using the product on their child. Notably, the product was removed from U.S. shelves in 2020.

“This case was not about compensation only. It was about truth and accountability,” stated Carley’s attorney, Ben Braly. This sentiment underscores the broader implications of the case, which extend beyond financial restitution.

The verdict adds to a series of legal challenges faced by Johnson & Johnson regarding the safety of its talc products. The company has been embroiled in litigation over claims that its talc-based powders are linked to ovarian cancer and mesothelioma, a cancer that affects the lungs and other organs. In a significant move, Johnson & Johnson ceased the sale of talc-based powder globally in 2023.

Haas criticized the lawsuits, labeling them as based on “junk science” and asserting that decades of research have proven Johnson & Johnson’s Baby Powder to be safe, devoid of asbestos, and not a cause of cancer. This statement reflects the company’s ongoing defense against the allegations.

Earlier this month, another jury in Los Angeles awarded $40 million to two women who claimed that Johnson & Johnson’s talcum powder was responsible for their ovarian cancer. Additionally, in October, a California jury ordered the company to pay $966 million to the family of a woman who died from mesothelioma, asserting that her cancer was caused by asbestos contamination in the baby powder she used.

Copyright 2025 Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.