After Stuart Linde died of mesothelioma in 2023, his estate sued Bristol Myers Squibb (BMS), blaming the company’s Ammens talc powder for his fatal illness. While the pharmaceutical giant filed a petition to have the case dismissed, the New York Supreme Court denied its motion for summary judgment, finding that genuine issues of fact need to be presented to and decided by a jury.
Decades of Exposure to Talc Blamed for Mesothelioma
Mr. Linde was diagnosed with pleural mesothelioma in February 2023 and died just four months later. His family blames the company’s Ammens powder for his death: he’d used the talc product on himself two to four times daily from 1985 to 2023, and while diapering three nieces, his nephew, and his grandson approximately 10 times daily from 2016 to 2019. In response, BMS argued both that its products do not contain asbestos and that any asbestos that might have been released from its product would not have been distinguishable from ambient air exposure levels.
To support its motion for summary judgment, BMS submitted expert witness testimony that relied on mathematical modeling examining hypothetical cumulative asbestos exposure to conclude that Mr. Linde’s mesothelioma “was not caused or contributed to by any cosmetic talc derived from Ammens.” In response, the family offered testimony that contradicted BMS’s experts’ conclusions about causation. Their witnesses relied on studies showing asbestos present in Italian talc ore samples and analyses finding tremolite, anthophyllite, and chrysotile in 79 of 91 samples of Cashmere Bouquet talcum powder—some sourced from the same Italian mines where Ammens had obtained its talc.
Conflicting Expert Testimony Leads to Denial of Case Being Dismissed
With the family’s expert witnesses asserting that Mr. Linde’s exposures to asbestos from Johnson’s Baby Powder, Ammen’s, Gold Bond, and Dr. Scholl’s had sufficient to cause his mesothelioma and the other side arguing that exposure to their product was no different from room air, the judge ruled that the contradicting opinions was a classic “battle of the experts.” He said that while BMS had demonstrated entitlement to summary judgment on general and specific causation, the genuine issues of material fact raised by the victim’s testimony and the family’s expert reports met the standard for establishing specific causation. As a result, the case will move forward to trial.
If you or someone you love has been diagnosed with mesothelioma, the Patient Advocates at Mesothelioma.net are here to help. Contact us today at 1-800-692-8608 to learn more.
