Johnson & Johnson company logo on headquarters building May 12, 2018, in Prague, Czech Republic. Credit: josefkubes/Shutterstock.com
A judge held Johnson & Johnson in contempt of court Monday after one of its witnesses who testified in a talcum powder trial failed to appear for cross-examination, according to the plaintiffs firm in the case.
20th Judicial Circuit Court Judge Christopher Kolker, in St. Clair County, Illinois, issued the contempt order against Johnson & Johnson and its vice president of women's health, Dr. Susan Nicholson, according to Montgomery, Alabama's Beasley Allen, which is representing plaintiff Colleen Cadagin in the trial.
"The contempt order by the judge in the ongoing Illinois jury trial is just an indication of how Johnson & Johnson has no respect for the law nor the judicial system," said Jere Beasley, of Beasley Allen, in a statement. "The company has shown no respect for the FDA nor any regulatory agency and has lied constantly to them about the great risk to the public about its talcum products. But more importantly, Johnson & Johnson has shown no feeling, concern or respect for the thousands of innocent women that it has killed over the years."
The judge said he would take sanctions under advisement but struck Nicholson's testimony from the record, informing the jury that she and Johnson & Johnson are in contempt of court. He also allowed Beasley Allen principal Leigh O'Dell to explain to the jury what she would have said during Nicholson's cross-examination.
New Jersey-based Johnson & Johnson, which was represented at trial by Allison Brown, a partner at Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom in New York, issued a statement: "We vehemently disagree with the court's ruling and, if necessary, will seek a reversal by the appellate court for the second time in this proceeding. The court ignored a sworn affidavit explaining why the witness could not return, in person, to Illinois. We offered the witness to appear to continue the cross examination via Zoom, which was rejected. We stand behind our employee's decision to not return to court in-person at this time."
It's not the first time judges have taken disciplinary action in a talcum powder trial. In 2019, Middlesex County Superior Court Judge Ana Viscomi tossed the entire closing argument of Johnson & Johnson attorney Diane Sullivan, of Weil, Gotshal & Manges, after she attacked the plaintiffs lawyers in a New Jersey talcum powder case involving a mesothelioma victim.
In 2020, New York Supreme Court Justice Manuel Mendez sanctioned Simmons Hanly Conroy, which represented mesothelioma victim Donald Minassian, the plaintiff in a talcum powder trial, for disclosing Johnson & Johnson CEO Alex Gorsky's deposition to Reuters.
The Illinois trial, which began July 12, is one of several that was sidelined due to the COVID-19 pandemic and was reset for trial as courthouses reopen. Cadagin filed the lawsuit after her sister, Elizabeth Driscoll, died in 2016 at age 69 from ovarian cancer.
Another talcum powder case, in the Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas, will start jury selection July 29. A third case is set to begin Sept. 10 in Missouri before 22nd Judicial Circuit Court Judge Rex Burlison, the same judge who oversaw some of the first talcum powder trials in the nation, including one in 2018 that ended in a $4.7 billion verdict, later reduced to $2.1 billion.
Amanda Bronstad
Amanda Bronstad is the ALM staff reporter covering class actions and mass torts nationwide. She writes the email dispatch Law.com Class Actions: Critical Mass. She is based in Los Angeles.