Court-Appointed Expert’s Report Threatens J&J Talc Defense
Legislation & Litigation
Written by Travis Rodgers | Edited by Amy Edel
Retired U.S. District Judge Freda Wolfson delivered what may be a major setback for Johnson & Johnson in its long-running talc litigation. Wolfson serves as a special master in the case, which means the court appointed her as a neutral expert to investigate the complex scientific issues and provide recommendations to help the judge make decisions.
Her report recommends allowing women with ovarian cancer to present medical and scientific experts who say J&J’s talc products caused their disease in federal court. Wolfson concluded that plaintiffs’ experts used reliable methods to support a “positive, statistically significant association” between genital talc use and ovarian cancer.
The litigation includes more than 67,500 lawsuits in New Jersey federal court that claim J&J talc products caused cancer. The decision moves these lawsuits closer to the first federal trials, which could start later this year.
J&J still insists its talc products are safe and don’t cause cancer. The company plans to challenge Wolfson’s recommendation with U.S. District Judge Michael Shipp, who oversees the federal talc lawsuits. The company also disputes any claim that its talc was contaminated with asbestos, even as plaintiffs continue to pursue ovarian cancer and mesothelioma lawsuits in state and federal courts.
Special Master Clears Path for Talc Science
Wolfson issued a detailed report that runs more than 650 pages and reviews years of talc science. Her recommendation focuses on whether juries can hear those experts, not on whether talc in fact causes cancer.
In her report, Wolfson says plaintiffs’ experts can testify that J&J talc products are capable of causing ovarian cancer. She based her conclusion on both older and newer research studying talc and cancer. She left some disputes over specific expert opinions for later hearings scheduled for the coming weeks.
The retired U.S. District Judge previously led the federal talc multidistrict litigation from 2016 until her retirement in 2023. In 2020, Wolfson issued an earlier ruling that also allowed many of the same experts to testify about a link between talc, asbestos contamination and cancer.
Judge Shipp later asked for a fresh review after rule changes strengthened courts’ “gatekeeper” role for expert evidence and new scientific data became available. If Shipp adopts Wolfson’s report, federal trials could start later this year and may influence settlement talks in cases involving both ovarian cancer and mesothelioma.
Johnson & Johnson Continues to Battle Cancer Claims
J&J framed the latest report as a legal error that the company expects Shipp to correct. Erik Haas, the company’s worldwide vice president of litigation, claims the ruling ignores stricter federal standards for scientific testimony.
Haas added, “We will continue to aggressively defend against these meritless cases one-by-one because valid science and the law are squarely on our side and will only continue to strengthen in our favor moving forward.” J&J plans to file formal objections and ask Shipp to block or limit the plaintiffs’ experts before any federal trials begin.
The expert‑testimony fight unfolds against a broader backdrop of failed bankruptcy attempts and high‑stakes state court trials. J&J tried 3 times to use bankruptcy to settle its talc liabilities globally, but Federal courts rejected each attempt to use bankruptcy to settle its talc liabilities. The company’s most recent failed bankruptcy attempt came in a court ruling in April 2025. Those moves paused many cases for years and delayed trial dates for people who say talc-based products caused their cancer.
Outside federal court, J&J faces a mix of verdicts in state talc trials with an October 2025 verdict hitting $966 million and a December verdict reaching $1.5 billion. The company has also sued scientists whose research supports plaintiffs, including a mesothelioma expert who linked talc use to asbestos exposure in a frequently cited study.
