J&J Talc Ovarian Cancer – Second Bellwether Trial

The plaintiffs are the families of Mary Owens, Bonnie Tienken and Geneva Williams, who allege years of using Johnson’s Baby Powder for feminine hygiene caused the women to develop ovarian cancer. According to the lawsuits, Johnson & Johnson knew for decades that asbestos contamination and health concerns associated with talc posed potential risks but continued marketing the products as safe and gentle for women and children.

During opening statements, plaintiffs’ attorneys reportedly pointed jurors to internal company records dating from the 1960s through the 1980s. The attorneys argued the documents demonstrate company awareness of asbestos concerns and alleged dangers associated with talc products. Rather than issuing warnings or changing practices, plaintiffs contend the company prioritized preserving sales of one of its most recognizable brands.

The company’s attorneys told jurors that scientific evidence will show its cosmetic talc products never contained asbestos and that no reliable evidence establishes a causal link between talc use and ovarian cancer. They further argued the company’s decision to replace talc with cornstarch in Baby Powder products reflected changing consumer perceptions rather than legitimate safety concerns.

Emotional Testimony

The trial also includes emotional testimony from family members describing years of product use and the impact of losing loved ones.

Kevin Tienken, son of plaintiff Bonnie Tienken, told jurors that Johnson’s Baby Powder was a constant presence in his home throughout his childhood and recalled his mother using it regularly. His sister, Kimberly Hedrick, testified that her mother taught her to use the talc for feminine hygiene and described the practice as routine. According to Law360, Hedrick told jurors “She used it religiously”;  that her mother used it after “every time she took a shower” and that applying it to her body was routine “like brushing her teeth.” Hedrick further testified that she saw her mother “dump it in her hand and wipe it in between her legs and sprinkle it in her panties” when getting ready. “We got ready together a lot,” she said, and that Johnson’s Baby Powder was “always part of our lives as long as I can remember.” Hedrick added that her mother never talked about the lawsuit, nor did she believe J&J Baby Powder caused her ovarian cancer. 

Jonathan Owens, whose mother Mary Owens died in 2021, similarly testified that he remembered his mother frequently using the product and could often smell it when hugging her. Video testimony from two of Mary Owens’ sisters, Elizabeth White and Margaret Montgomery, also described longstanding use of the talc for feminine hygiene practices within the family.

The cases are Owens, et al. v. Johnson & Johnson, et al., Case No. CIVDS1618507; Tienken, et al. v. Johnson & Johnson, et al., Case No. 18CECG01553; Williams Jr. v. Johnson & Johnson, et al., Case No. CIVDS1807370; and the coordinated proceeding Johnson & Johnson Talcum Powder Cases, Case No. JCCP4872, in the Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles.

Ongoing J&J Talc Ovarian Cancer Litigation

As of May 2026, over 90,000 talcum powder lawsuits have been filed against product manufacturers and suppliers; there are 67,623 plaintiffs in the Johnson & Johnson Talcum Powder Products MDL and these cases are coordinated for pretrial discovery in re Johnson & Johnson Talcum Powder Products Marketing, Sales Practices and Products Liability Litigation, MDL No. 2738, overseen by Judge Michael A. Shipp.

In 2025 alone, Johnson & Johnson was ordered to pay over $2.5 Billion to mesothelioma and ovarian cancer talc victims — $40 million of which was awarded in the first Los Angeles bellwether (mentioned above) for two women who developed ovarian cancer after using J&J talc products. These amounts indicate how relatively few ovarian cancer claims have advanced to trial compared with mesothelioma allegations, despite many talc cases that have gone to trial.

This second bellwether trial may have significant impact on thousands of pending talc lawsuits nationwide as both sides continue to battle over scientific evidence, corporate conduct and the question at the center of the litigation: whether long-term cosmetic talc use can contribute to ovarian cancer risk.