Asbestos in Talc and Vermiculite: Asbestos Court Decisions

Decisions in our case-law library that involve talc and vermiculite: 231 cases, by state. Each line gives the exposure the court described, or else what it decided. For the topic itself, see Asbestos in Talc and Vermiculite.

North Carolina

• Bell v. American International Industries (2018). Hairdresser at 1950s to 2009
• Finch v. BASF Catalysts LLC (2018). Worked at tire factory at Firestone tire factory, Wilson, 1975-1995
• Vanhoy v. American International Industries (2018). User of hygiene products at Salisbury, 1969
• Young v. American Talc Company (2017). Avid bowler at bowling alleys in Kannapolis and Salisbury, North Carolina and Rock Hill, South Carolina, 1990s-2013
• Branson v. American International Industries (2016). Consumer of talc product
• Young v. 3M Company (2016). Industrial and mechanic trades

Ohio

• Keiser v. Donald Mckay Smith, Inc. (2023). Employee at Mansfield Plumbing at Mansfield Plumbing, Perrysville, 1964-2003
• Taylor v. BASF Catalysts, LLC (8th Appellate District, 2023). Son of a laborer and machine operator who brought fibers home at Firestone Tire Plant, Akron, 1953-1971
• Horton v. Harwick Chem. Corp. (1995). Worker at the DTR plant at Dayton Tire and Rubber Company plant (DTR)

Oklahoma

• In re Imerys Talc America, Inc. (2019). User of talc products

Oregon

• Chatfield v. Brenntag North America, Inc. (2023). Purchaser/user of talcum products at Woodvillage Market & Deli
• Levin v. Johnson & Johnson (2019). Nurse
• Levin v. Johnson & Johnson (2019). The court corrected a clerk's error by remanding the claims against all non-J&J defendants to Multnomah County Circuit Court and denied those defendants' motions to dismiss as moot; the claims against J&J stayed in federal court.

Other federal courts

• Barlow v. Colgate Palmolive Co. (2014). The en banc Fourth Circuit reversed the district court's orders denying Colgate-Palmolive's Rule 11 and Rule 60(b)(3) motions, holding that the court had jurisdiction to consider them, and remanded for the district court to rule on the merits.
• Chism v. WR Grace & Co. (1998). Mixing operator and bagger in the specialties department at A.P. Green Refractories Company plant, Mexico, Missouri, 1952-1955 and 1957-1964
• Jackson v. Anchor Packing Co. (1993). Tireworker at Mohawk Tire and Rubber Company plant, West Helena, 1963-79

Pennsylvania

• Fisher v. American International Industries (2024). Hairdresser and beauty salon owner at Sandy's Beauty Shop, 1960-1985
• Brandt v. Bon-Ton Stores, Inc. (2020). Consumer user of talcum powder at 1956-1970
• Shook v. Avon Products, Inc. (2019). User of talc products
• Youse & Youse v. Johnson & Johnson (2019). Personal user of cosmetic talcum powder
• Sealover v. Carey Canada (1992). Carpenter at Cumberland County Courthouse, Carlisle, 1960-61

Rhode Island

• Westfall v. Whittaker, Clark & Daniels (1983). Uniroyal, Inc. plant, Providence, 1946-1975

South Carolina

• Nicolas v. Johnson & Johnson (2019). Beginning in the 1950s
• Bostic v. 3M Company (2018). User of baby powder at her South Carolina home and other homes, beginning in the 1980s

Texas

• Wisener v. Revlon Consumer Products Corp. (2022). Consumer of talcum powder and cosmetic products at several decades
• Bradshaw v. Johnson & Johnson (2019). Consumer of baby powder
• Williams v. Avon Products, Inc. (2019). Child exposed to mother's and sister's use of talcum powder

Washington

• Hodjera v. BASF Catalysts LLC (2017). Toronto, 1986-1994

Wisconsin

• Chapp v. Colgate-Palmolive Company (1st District, 2019). User of talcum powder at 1969-1985
• Miller v. American Art Clay Co. Inc. (2014). Artist and art professor working in clay at studio in the basement of his home, 1978 to the early 1990s

Wyoming

• Covington v. WR Grace-Conn., Inc. (1998). Worked in various positions for a refinery at refinery, 1952-1990