Legal Opinion · Dissent
In Re Johnson & Johnson Talcum Powder Prods. Mktg., Sales Practices & Liab. Litig.
Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
Decided September 6, 2018No. 17-2980Published
1DissentFuentes, Circuit Judge
Juries across the country have returned verdicts finding, among other things, that Johnson & Johnson is liable to consumers of Johnson's Baby Powder for its propensity to increase the risk of ovarian cancer in women.1 This case is not about that. Mona Estrada, a longtime consumer of Johnson's Baby Powder, makes no claim that she *294herself experienced a higher risk of ovarian cancer due to her use of the product. Instead, she alleges that Johnson & Johnson misrepresented what it sold her: a product, safe for daily use, that absorbs bodily moisture. She alleges that, had she known that the…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Lujan v. Defenders of WildlifeSupreme Court of the United States · 1992
- United States v. Students Challenging Regulatory Agency Procedures (SCRAP)Supreme Court of the United States · 1973
- Kwikset Corp. v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 2011
- Mazza v. American Honda Motor Co., Inc.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2012
- Josh Finkelman v. National Football LeagueCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2016
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.