Philadelphia Jury Awards $250K Verdict Against J&J in Talc Lawsuit

Marks first plaintiffs' win in city's sprawling talc mass tort case against healthcare giant

Published on Feb. 13, 2026

Got story updates? Submit your updates here. ›

A Philadelphia jury has delivered a $250,000 verdict against Johnson & Johnson in a lawsuit brought by the family of a woman who alleged the company's talcum powder contributed to her fatal ovarian cancer. The decision comes after a three-week trial and marks the first plaintiffs' win in the city's talc mass tort case against the healthcare giant, which encompasses roughly 175 cases.

Why it matters

This verdict, though modest compared to other recent talc lawsuit judgments, carries symbolic weight as the first plaintiffs' win in Philadelphia's sprawling talc litigation against J&J. The case highlights ongoing legal battles over the potential cancer risks associated with the company's once-iconic talcum powder products.

The details

The jury awarded $50,000 in compensatory damages and $200,000 in punitive damages to the estate of Gayle Emerson. Defense attorneys argued that Emerson's ovarian cancer was linked to other risk factors like regular douching, obesity, and age, rather than J&J's talc products. However, the plaintiff's attorney accused J&J of concealing the presence of asbestos in its baby powder for decades.

  • The three-week trial concluded on February 10, 2026 with closing arguments.
  • The jury deliberated for three-and-a-half days before delivering the $250,000 verdict on February 13, 2026.

The players

Johnson & Johnson

A multinational corporation that develops medical devices, pharmaceutical, and consumer packaged goods. It is currently facing thousands of lawsuits alleging its talcum powder products caused cancer.

Gayle Emerson

A woman whose estate brought the lawsuit against J&J, alleging the company's talcum powder contributed to her fatal ovarian cancer.

Leigh O'Dell

An attorney from Beasley Allen Law Firm who represented Emerson's estate in the trial.

Shaila Diwan

An attorney from Kirkland & Ellis LLP who represented J&J in the trial, arguing that other risk factors, not the talc products, caused Emerson's cancer.

Judge Sean Kennedy

The Philadelphia County Court of Common Pleas judge presiding over the talc trial.

Got photos? Submit your photos here. ›

What they’re saying

“Johnson & Johnson hid the presence of asbestos in Johnson's baby powder from the FDA, the regulators, and people like Ms. Emerson since the 1960s. The evidence could not be more clear.”

— Leigh O'Dell, Attorney, Beasley Allen Law Firm

“Whatever the amount is, it should be enough in light of this net worth to send a message.”

— Leigh O'Dell, Attorney, Beasley Allen Law Firm

“They want to put their talc blinders on. What the evidence has shown is that it wasn't Johnson's baby powder.”

— Shaila Diwan, Attorney, Kirkland & Ellis LLP

What’s next

The judge in the case will decide on Tuesday whether to allow Johnson & Johnson to appeal the $250,000 verdict.

The takeaway

This modest but symbolically significant verdict in Philadelphia's talc litigation underscores the ongoing legal battles facing Johnson & Johnson over the potential cancer risks associated with its once-ubiquitous talcum powder products.