NEW YORK (Legal Newsline) - A New York appeals court ordered an expert to turn over the names of patients she cited in a paper that provided crucial support to disputed claims talcum powder can cause cancer.
Saying the information “is clearly relevant” to pending New Jersey litigation against Johnson & Johnson, the New York Appellate Division reversed a lower court decision to quash the subpoena seeking information from Dr. Jacqueline Moline.
Production of the information sought by the subpoenas would not be unduly burdensome, nor is it likely to have a chilling effect on future medical research,” concluded the three-judge panel of the First Division in an Oct. 8 ruling.
Johnson & Johnson says it needs the identities of the 33 mesothelioma patients in two studies to show Moline created a “false narrative” stating they had no exposure to asbestos other than Johnson’s Baby Powder. With the names of the study subjects, J&J can search court files to determine if the same people filed lawsuits and bankruptcy claims stating they were injured by products other than talcum powder.
Dr. Moline is an occupational health expert with Northwell Health who has also earned millions of dollars as an expert for plaintiff lawyers in asbestos litigation. JNJ’s LTL unit, which is seeking to settle talc claims in bankruptcy court for more than $1 billion, sued Dr. Moline for fraud in 2022, claiming all of the subjects in her studies were asbestos litigants and she knew at least five were, since she served as an expert witness in their cases. That case ended when a court dismissed the first LTL bankruptcy for lack of evidence the unit was in financial distress. JNJ is trying again with the support of a majority of talc plaintiff lawyers.
Dr. Moline argued the patient names were protected by HIPAA, the patient health information act. But the appeals court said HIPAA doesn’t apply since the patients never agreed to participate in research and provided their information willingly in public litigation.
Dr. Moline served as an expert witness in the case of Stephen Lanzo, for example, which LTL identified as “Case #6” in her study based upon identical information including his age and the fact he was diagnosed after developing chest pain playing hockey in 2012.
Another plaintiff expert identified crocidolite asbestos in Lanzo’s lung tissue, which Dr. Moline should have been aware of since she testified in his trial, the company said. Yet in her article she said none of the study subjects had been exposed to crocidolite, an industrial form of asbestos.
Dr. Moline also was an expert for Valerie Jo Dalis, who shared identical details with “Case #4,” yet Dalis submitted a claim for $450,000 and collected $28,000 from the Manville trust for victims of industrial asbestos exposure.
Dr. Moline is among a core group of plaintiff experts who have earned millions of dollars by supporting the theory cosmetic talc contains asbestos – which J&J and other producers deny – and that the deadly fibers are in sufficient concentration to cause cancer.
Other experts critical to the plaintiffs’ theories include William Longo, who claims he has found asbestos fibers in decades-old talc samples; Dr. David Egilman, who edited a journal that published some early studies linking talc to cancer, and who has testified on everything from asbestos to supposedly dangerous popcorn fumes; and Ronald Gordon, a researcher who earlier in his career admitted to bank fraud and money laundering.