Get a Lawyer

As complicated as our society has become, everyone needs an attorney at some point in life. We're here to help. To contact one of our attorneys now, call 1.800.733.5342, or click here to send us an email.

Servicio De Referencia De Abogados

En algún punto de tu vida vas a necesitar un abogado para casos de lesiones personales, mal prácticas medicas, para pelear por una compensación salarial y otros casos similares.[Clic Aquí]

Understand Federal Crime

The judicial process in a federal criminal case is different from a state case in many ways. You you are arrested, you need to understand the difference.[Read More]

Lawyers, Why Join?

Todays legal market is dramatically different. The internet and economic downturn have created a dilemma for small firms — a much larger advertising budget is now required.[Read More]

Florida Talcum Powder Lawyers

Written by Attorney Referral Service. Posted in Attorney Referral, Baby powder lawyer, Class Action Lawsuits, Injury Lawyer News, injury lawyers, TALCUM, Talcum powder lawsuit, Talcum Powder ovarian cancer lawyer

Do You Have A Diagnosis Of Ovarian Cancer?

Have You Used J & J Baby Powder or Shower To Shower Talc Powder For Years?

You may have a talcum powder ovarian cancer lawsuit.

Lawyers For Florida Talcum Powder Ovarian Cancer  Lawsuits

 Is There a Difference Between a  Talc Powder Lawsuit  and  A Talcum Powder Lawsuit?

Talcum Powder, Johnson and Johnson Baby Powder, Talc Powder  Cancer Lawsuits

The first baby powder cancer lawsuit was won in 2013. In a recent lawsuit against Johnson and Johnson a jury  awarded $72 million. In May 2016, a jury in St. Louis, Missouri  awarded $55 million to a woman who was diagnosed with ovarian cancer after using Johnson’s Baby Powder for almost 40 years.

 

  • Do You Have Ovarian Cancer?
  • Did you use talc powder daily for at least five years prior to the diagnosis?
  • Did You Lose A Loved One To Ovarian Cancer?
  • Did She use Talcum Powder for years?
  • Did you have a diagnosis of ovarian or fallopian tube cancer within the last ten years?
  • Did you have surgery?

.

Talcum Powder  Lawsuit Criteria

You must have used  Johnson & Johnson baby powder, Shower To Shower  talcum powder.
Did you dust your  genital area with the talcum powder or Baby Powder?
Have you been tested for and do you have a  BRCA 1 gene or BRCA 2 gene. You cannot have a positive test result for the BRCA 1 gene or BRCA 2 gene.
Are you younger then 65 years of age?
Use of talcum powder (baby powder) must have been a  daily habit for over  five years.
Did you use Johnson & Johnson baby powder or Shower To Shower (talcum powder)?
Did you use talcum powder on your genital area?

Our Florida  Talcum Powder Lawyers Are Currently Accepting  Talc Lawsuits For

  • Johnson’s Baby Powder by Johnson & Johnson
  • Shower to Shower by Valeant Pharmaceuticals

 

Women are reporting ovarian cancer from years of using talc products like Johnson and Johnson Baby Powder  and Shower to Shower. It appears that the talc, when used to dry private areas, travels and results in Ovarian cancer. This is another example of a company placing profits over warnings. A Talc Ovarian Cancer Helpline has been launched to guide women who think their ovarian cancer may be related to the use of Talc Products.

Have you been diagnosed with ovarian cancer from long term use  of talcum powder or baby powder for personal hygiene?  Learn about your right to  file a Talcum Powder Ovarian Cancer  lawsuit against the talcum powder manufacturer.

 

The Huffington Post tells us:

 

“In 1971 study conducted conducted by Dr. W.J. Henderson and others in Cardiff, Wales, suggested an association between talc and ovarian cancer.
In 1982, the first epidemiologic study was performed on talc powder use in the female genital area. Conducted by Dr. Daniel Cramer and others, the study found a 92% increased risk in ovarian cancer with women who reported genital talc use.
Since then, there have been approximately 22 additional epidemiologic studies providing data regarding the association of talc and ovarian cancer. Nearly all of these studies have reported an elevated risk for ovarian cancer associated with genital talc use in women.
In 1993, the US National Toxicology Program (NTP) published a study on the toxicity of non-asbestiform talc and found clear evidence of carcinogenic activity. Talc was found to be a carcinogen, with or without the presence of asbestos-like fibers.”

 

Si ha utilizado polvo de bebé de Johnson, Ducha de Ducha, u otro producto de polvos de talco y fueron diagnosticados con cáncer de ovario, usted puede tener un derecho legal.

FIND OUT IF YOU QUALIFY FOR A FLORIDA  TALCUM POWDER OVARIAN CANCER LAWSUIT

New Baby Powder Lawsuit | Ovarian Cancer From Talcum Powder

Written by Attorney Referral Service. Posted in Atlanta Baby Powder lawyer, Baby Powder lawsuit, Baby powder lawyer, Baby Powder ovarian cancer lawsuit, Drug and devices lawyers, Florida Baby powder lawyer, Johnsons Baby Powder lawsuit, Legal News, Shower to Shower lawyer, Talc ovarian cancer lawyer, Talcom powder ovarian cancer lawsuit, Talcum powder lawsuit, Talcum powder lawyer, Used Baby Powder All my Life

Talcum Powder – Ovarian Cancer Lawsuit Division Opens

Due to the huge number of calls from women who have used Johnson's Baby Powder or Shower To Shower and now have a diagnosis of ovarian cancer a special department for  Ovarian Cancer- Talcum Powder Lawsuits has been opened. 

A New Baby Powder Cancer Lawsuit Goes to Trial in St. Louis and we know that there will be more calls from women nationwide as the news of new lawsuits hits the news.

The Ovarian Cancer- Talcum Powder Lawsuit

Two months after a jury in St. Louis awarded $72 million, a second trial is underway on behalf of a woman who developed ovarian cancer after using Johnson’s Baby Powder for 40 years.

A jury in St. Louis will soon decide whether to award compensation to a woman who developed ovarian cancer after using Johnson’s Baby Powder for over 40 years.

The lawsuit is Ristesund v. Johnson & Johnson Case No. 1422-CC09012-01 in Missouri Circuit Court.

She Used Baby Powder All Her Life

The plaintiff is Gloria Ristesund, a 62 year-old woman who used baby powder genitally for most of her life. In 2011, she was diagnosed with endometrioid ovarian cancer and had a hysterectomy.

Lawyers say her repeated use of baby powder and pre-existing endometriosis increased her risk of ovarian cancer by 214%. They say Johnson & Johnson knew about the risk but failed to warn consumers.

Slogans Enticed Her

Instead, the company marketed talcum powder to adult women with slogans like “Just a sprinkle a day helps keep odor away.” Ristesund says she never would have used baby powder if she had known about the risk.

In opening arguments, lawyers told the jury: “This case is about profit over human life — specifically, women’s lives. … [J&J] put a corporate philosophy of profit over the safety of their customers.”

Marketing Directed To Hispanic Women

Lawyers presented several internal memos as evidence, including one from 1992 in which the company acknowledges the risk of cancer. The same memo recommends increasing marketing efforts toward black and Hispanic women.

In another memo from 1994, an expert warned that anybody who denies the link between talc and cancer is “denying the obvious in the face of all evidence to the contrary.”

This is the third trial against Johnson & Johnson over talcum powder. In February 2016, another jury in St. Louis awarded $72 million to the family of Jacqueline Fox, a black woman from Alabama who died of ovarian cancer after using baby powder for more than 35 years.

1200 Ovarian Cancer Lawsuits

Approximately 1,200 ovarian cancer lawsuits are now pending against Johnson & Johnson nationwide. The size of the litigation has grown rapidly since November 2013, when a jury in South Dakota found the company negligent for failing to warn woman about the risk of cancer.

Evidence linking talc and cancer has been growing for decades. A study in 1971 found particles of talc in ovarian tissue from women with cancer, proving it can travel through the reproductive system.

Talc is an extremely soft mineral with a structure similar to asbestos, a known carcinogen. Before the 1970s, talcum powder was often contaminated with asbestos. Baby powder is now asbestos-free, but studies continue to demonstrate a 20-30% increased risk of ovarian cancer in women who use it routinely for genital hygiene.

If you believe your diagnosis of ovarian cancer is due to your use of Talcum powder call our Talcum Powder lawsuit division today.

 

Send all inquiries to: AAA Attorney Referral Service 1

800 733-5342

7050 W. Palmetto Park Road, Boca Raton, FL 33433
Attorneys who cover Boca Raton, Delray Beach, and Palm Beach County

1401 Broadway, New York, NY 10018

20 N.Orange Ave, Orlando, FL 32801
Attorneys who cover Orlando, Winter Park, Winterhaven, Kissimmee,Ocala,Atlamonte Springs,Deland,Melbourne, Daytona. Orange,Osceola,Seminole,Lake,Volusia, Polk and Brevard Counties

5713 Corporate Way, West Palm Beach, FL
Attorneys who cover: Lake Worth, West Palm Beach, Jupiter, Stuart,Port St Lucie, Okeechobee, Belle Glade, Vero Beach, Palm Bay Palm Beach, Martin, St Lucie and Indian River counties

200 Biscayne Blvd., Miami, FL 33131
Attorneys who cover Miami, Hialeah, Miami Beach and the Florida Keys including all of Dade and Monroe counties

110 E. Broward Blvd., Ft. Lauderdale , FL 33301
Attorneys who cover Hollywood,Fort Lauderdale,Pompano, Deerfield Beach, Coral Springs and all of Broward County

3630 W. Kennedy Blvd., Tampa, FL 33360
Attorneys who cover Tampa, Brandon, Clearwater, St Pete, New Port Richey, Brooksville, Sarasota, Naple, Venice, Bradenton, Fort Myers, Cape Coral and all of Hernanado, Citrus, Pasco, Pinnellas, Hillsboro, Sarasota, Manatee, Lee and Collier counties.

10151 Deerwood Park # 200-250, Jacksonville, FL
Attorneys who cover  Jacksonville, Jacksonville Beach, St. Augustine, Orange Park all of Northeast Florida including Marion Sumter, Flager and Duval counties. Also Attorneys who cover Northwest Florida including: Tallahassee, Pensacola, Panama City and Starke.

233 Peachtree Street N.E., Atlanta, GA 30303
Attorneys who cover Atlanta, Decatur, Roswell, Marietta, Jonesboro, Gainesville, New Smyrna, Fayetteville, Buford, Cartersville, Lilburn, Macon, Augusta, Savanah, and all of Georgia.

1001 G Street NW, Washington, DC 20001

Washington DC Bar eithics opinion

Opinion 342

Participation in Internet-Based Lawyer Referral Services Requiring Payment of Fees

Lawyers may participate in both not-for-profit and for-profit lawyer Internet-based referral services where the services require a flat fee for participation, a flat fee for transmitting the lawyer’s name to a potential client, and/or a flat fee for every client secured as a result of a referral

.

4201 Wilshire Blvd., Los Angeles, CA 90010

Alabama: No representation is made that the quality of the legal services to be performed is greater than the quality of legal services performed by other lawyers.

Colorado: Colorado does not certify attorneys as specialists in any field.

Florida: The hiring of a lawyer is an important decision that should not be based solely upon advertisements. Before you decide, ask us to send you free written information about our qualifications and experience.

Georgia :Georgia Bar:

101 Marietta Street

Atlanta Ga 30303

A Lawyer may pay the usual and reasonable fees or dues charged by a bonafide lawyer referral service operated by an organization ......and qualified to do business in this state Rule7.3(c)(1)

Iowa: The determination of the need for legal services and the choice of a lawyer are extremely important decisions and should not be based solely upon advertisements or self-proclaimed expertise. This disclosure is required by rule of the Supreme Court of Iowa.

NOTICE TO THE PUBLIC: Memberships and offices in legal fraternities and legal societies, technical and professional licenses, and memberships in scientific, technical and professional associations and societies of law or field of practice do not mean that a lawyer is a specialist or expert in a field of law, nor do they mean that such a lawyer is necessarily any more expert or competent than any other lawyer. All potential clients are urged to make their own independent investigation and evaluation of any lawyer being considered. This notice is required by rule of the Supreme Court of Iowa.

Kentucky and Oregon: THIS IS AN ADVERTISEMENT.

Mississippi: The Mississippi Supreme Court advises that a decision on legal services is important and should not be based solely on advertisements.

Missouri: Neither the Supreme Court of Missouri nor the Missouri Bar reviews or approves certifying organizations or specialist designations.

Nevada: The State Bar of Nevada does not certify any lawyer as a specialist or expert.

New Mexico: LAWYER ADVERTISEMENT.

Tennessee: None of the attorneys in this firm are certified as a Civil Trial, Criminal Trial, Business Bankruptcy, Consumer Bankruptcy, Creditor's Rights, Medical Malpractice, Legal Malpractice, Accounting Malpractice, Estate Planning or Elder Law specialist by the Tennessee Commission on Continuing Legal Education and Specialization. Certification as a specialist in all other listed areas is not currently available in Tennessee.

Texas: Unless otherwise stated, attorneys claiming certification in an area of law are not certified by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization. Texas lawyers may participate in a privately sponsored internet service that obtains information over the internet from potential clients about their legal problems and forwards the information to lawyers who have paid to participate in the internet service.

Wyoming: The Wyoming State Bar does not certify any lawyer as a specialist or expert. Anyone considering a lawyer should independently investigate the lawyer's credential and ability, and not rely upon advertisements or self-proclaimed expertise. *** If you do not have the money to hire an attorney, you should call the legal aid office in your area. Because the law does change, this site and the information in it may have become outdated. You should be aware that changes may have taken place in the law or in court rules that would affect the accuracy of anything shown here.