The fourth in a series of talc powder trials is soon to begin in a mass tort litigation in St. Louis.

Plaintiff Nora D. says she developed ovarian cancer after using Johnson & Johnson talcum powder for 36 years.

She is seeking to hold Johnson & Johnson and talc supplier Imerys Talc America responsible for failing to warn her about the risk of cancer associated with talc.

Nora’s talc powder trial arises out of one of many similar talcum powder lawsuits now pending in Missouri state court in St. Louis.

Plaintiffs in these talcum powder cancer lawsuits generally claim that Johnson & Johnson and Imerys knew for decades about a risk of ovarian cancer linked to women’s use of talcum powder in their genital area, yet failed to issue appropriate warnings to users of talc-based products.

According to the plaintiffs, researchers say talcum powder applied near the genital area may be able to migrate all the way to the ovaries. Once there, talc particles may become embedded in ovarian tissue and remain, heightening the woman’s risk of developing ovarian cancer.

Plaintiffs claim Johnson & Johnson knew about this research for years, yet the pharmaceutical and personal care giant did nothing to warn consumers about this risk.

In fact, plaintiffs accuse Johnson & Johnson of actively concealing the scientific evidence of this risk in an effort to avoid harming sales of talc-based products like Johnson’s Baby Powder and Shower to Shower.

Some plaintiffs claim Johnson & Johnson actively promoted perineal use of talcum powder to minority populations that, statistically speaking, are already at an elevated risk for cancer.

For years, cornstarch-based products have offered consumers a talc-free alternative to the products at issue. Plaintiffs point out that had they been properly warned about the risks associated with talc, they would have opted to use cornstarch products instead and would have avoided the increase in their risk of cancer.

Johnson & Johnson maintains its talc-based products are safe to use. The company cites scientific evidence of its own that allegedly shows no link between talc powder use and ovarian cancer.

Imerys has managed to avoid liability in all but one previous talc powder trial. Nora’s case will be the next attempt to ascribe liability to this miner and supplier of talc.

Other Cases Headed for Talc Powder Trial

The first jury decision in a talc powder trial came down in 2013 in South Dakota. While those jurors determined that Johnson & Johnson had been negligent in its failure to warn, they did not find that the company’s behavior had caused the plaintiff’s cancer.

In the St. Louis trials, other plaintiffs have been more successful. So far, three previous talc powder trials in 2016 have yielded a total of $190 million in jury awards for cancer victims and their families.

Attorneys expect a massive influx of new talcum powder lawsuits like these. A plaintiff’s attorney who handled the three earlier trials in St. Louis says his firm alone had filed almost 1,000 cases and has received over 32,000 inquiries from other potential claimants.

Nora’s Talc Powder Trial is Case No. 1422-CC09326-01 in the 22nd Judicial Circuit Court for the State of Missouri.