Photo by ajay_suresh, Johnson & Johnson (J&J), licensed under CC BY 4.0. Source: Wikimedia Commons.
A California jury has awarded $34.21 million to a man who developed mesothelioma after decades of using talcum powder products, including Johnson's Baby Powder.
The verdict, delivered Monday, followed an eight-week trial in Alameda County Superior Court. Jurors found that Johnson & Johnson failed to adequately warn consumers about asbestos contamination in its talc products and that the failure contributed to plaintiff Kevin Reikes' cancer.
The jury assigned Johnson & Johnson 40% of the responsibility, with the remaining 60% attributed to Dr. Scholl's, another talcum powder brand Reikes used. The Dr. Scholl's defendant had settled before trial.
Johnson & Johnson disputes the verdict and says it will appeal.
Decades of Talcum Powder Use Preceded Cancer Diagnosis
Reikes, a Sacramento-area communications executive, testified that he began regularly using talcum powder products in the 1970s.
He was diagnosed with mesothelioma in June 2025 and began chemotherapy the following month. He has since undergone surgeries involving his abdomen and chest to treat the disease.
Mesothelioma is a rare, aggressive cancer most commonly associated with asbestos exposure. Although the disease is frequently linked to industrial and occupational settings, asbestos exposure can also occur through contaminated consumer products.
Talc and asbestos are naturally occurring minerals that can form near one another underground. Depending on where talc is mined and how it is processed, asbestos contamination can be a concern.
That relationship has become central to thousands of lawsuits involving talcum powder products sold over several decades.
Jury Finds Johnson's Baby Powder Defective
During the trial, the plaintiffs presented evidence that Johnson & Johnson knew about the possibility of asbestos contamination in talc but failed to provide adequate warnings.
The jury concluded that Johnson's Baby Powder was defective and that the company's failure to warn about asbestos was a substantial factor in causing Reikes' mesothelioma.
Evidence presented by the plaintiffs also challenged the company's historical product-testing practices and its response to scientific concerns about asbestos in talc.
The plaintiffs maintained that Johnson & Johnson had known for decades about the health risks associated with asbestos and the possibility that talc products could contain the carcinogenic mineral.
The jury ultimately found Johnson & Johnson negligent.
However, the allocation of responsibility means the company will not necessarily be required to pay the entire $34.21 million award. California law treats economic and noneconomic damages differently when multiple parties share responsibility, and the final judgment may also be affected by the earlier settlement.
Johnson & Johnson Says It Will Appeal
Johnson & Johnson strongly rejected the verdict in a statement.
The company challenged the evidence concerning Reikes' use of Johnson's Baby Powder, arguing that witnesses, including members of his family, had not corroborated that use.
J&J also disputed the scientific evidence presented at trial and maintained that its talcum powder products did not contain asbestos or cause cancer.
"We will immediately appeal this verdict," the company said.
Johnson & Johnson has consistently maintained that its talc-based products were safe despite adverse verdicts in asbestos-related cancer lawsuits.
The company discontinued sales of talc-based Johnson's Baby Powder in the United States in 2020 and later transitioned to cornstarch-based powder globally.
Another Significant Verdict in Talc Litigation
The California verdict adds to a continuing series of lawsuits over allegations that asbestos-contaminated talcum powder caused mesothelioma.
Just days earlier, on November 6, a Massachusetts jury awarded approximately $1.9 million in another mesothelioma case involving Johnson & Johnson talc products.
The Reikes verdict is particularly significant because the jury found that exposure to a familiar household product, rather than industrial asbestos materials, substantially contributed to the plaintiff's disease.
Whether the full award survives post-trial challenges and appeal remains to be seen.
The case is Reikes et al. v. Block Drug Company Inc. et al., No. 25CV157993, in Alameda County Superior Court, California.
Explore More Asbestos Coverage
Read MedTruth's previous reporting on asbestos exposure, cancer risks and product liability litigation.
References:
Courtroom View Network. Reikes et al. v. Block Drug Company Inc. et al. Alameda County Superior Court, California, Case No. 25CV157993. November 2026.
Johnson & Johnson. Johnson & Johnson Statement on Reikes Trial. Facts About Talc. November 9, 2026.
Johnson & Johnson. Johnson & Johnson Consumer Health to Transition Global Baby Powder Portfolio to Cornstarch. August 11, 2022.
MassArbitration. J&J $34 Million Talc Verdict: Alameda Jury Splits Fault 40/60 With Dr. Scholl's in Reikes Mesothelioma Case. November 11, 2026.
Lawsuit Information
Talcum powder has been tied to ovarian cancer by patients in ongoing lawsuits.
Keywords
MedTruth Editors