FREE Case Evaluation: 1-800-375-6160
People are filing hair relaxer lawsuits because they believe the prolonged use of these products has caused them to develop uterine cancer. They are seeking compensation from the hair relaxer manufacturers through product liability lawsuits.
One of the main allegations is that the manufacturers did not adequately warn consumers about the potential risks. Plaintiffs argue that if they had known about these health hazards, they would have made different choices about using the products.
In addition to individual cases, multi-district litigations are also being formed. These MDLs consolidate individual lawsuits to address common issues, such as whether hair relaxers have the potential to cause cancer on a larger scale. The goal is to hold hair relaxer manufacturers accountable and prevent future harm.
The main health implication of using hair relaxers that has led to lawsuits is the development risk of uterine cancer. People allege that long-term use of these products has directly contributed to their cancer diagnosis and are seeking compensation through legal action.
Apart from developing uterine cancer, the following are the other known health issues associated with hair relaxer use:
Victims of hair relaxer health issues become eligible to file a hair relaxer cancer lawsuit if they have suffered adverse health effects, such as uterine cancer, directly attributed to the use of hair relaxer products. These individuals can pursue legal action against the manufacturers chemical hair relaxer products by filing product liability lawsuits, either individually or as part of a multidistrict litigation, to seek compensation for their damages.
One of the key factors to establish eligibility is the timing of the diagnosis in relation to the usage of the product. Plaintiffs often need to provide medical records, purchase receipts, or other evidence to show a clear timeline linking their condition to using hair relaxers. Expert testimonies may also be used to establish the connection between the product and the health issue.
Additionally, eligibility can be enhanced if a victim joins a multidistrict litigation or class-action lawsuit. These collective legal actions pool together individual cases to address common issues and can make the legal process more efficient. Joining an MDL or class action can also provide plaintiffs with access to shared resources and expertise, increasing their chances of a successful outcome.
The following are the steps to file a hair relaxer lawsuit:
Potential compensation in hair relaxer use lawsuits could range from $150,000 to $1,600,000. Medical expenses can be claimed for both past and future treatments related to the adverse effects of using hair relaxers.
Lost wages may be claimed as a hair relaxer settlement if the health issues have led to time off work or reduced the victim’s earning capacity. Additional amounts may also be awarded for emotional distress, pain, and suffering or to punish the company for negligence in the form of punitive damages.
Judge Sheila M. Finnegan has designated Honourable Paul Grimm as the Special Master for Electronic Discovery in the case. This appointment came despite the defendants' suggestion to award the role to Judge Sidney Schenkier.
Lawyers in the hair relaxer MDL are focusing on cases linking hair relaxers to uterine, endometrial, and ovarian cancers, with over 8,000 cases pending. A detailed schedule leading to potential bellwether trials by late 2025 is set, emphasizing the importance of Plaintiff Fact Sheets for detailed case information and deadlines for discovery and expert reports.
The hair relaxer class action MDL experienced significant growth over the past few months, with several thousand new cases added each month since the summer, but recently, this trend abruptly slowed, with only 17 new cases filed last month, bringing the total to 7,894 pending cases.
During the hair relaxer MDL class action lawsuit status conference in Illinois, the court requested a new briefing schedule and addressed disagreements over the scheduling of Science Day, with key submissions due by early December. The parties are working on a Case Management Order, and defendants reported on similar state court lawsuits without seeking specific court actions. Additionally, document production timelines were set, including Revlon and Avalon's obligations for specific document and ingredient list disclosures by mid-December, with ESI discovery issues referred to Magistrate Judge Finnegan.
The MDL for hair relaxer lawsuits has expanded to include 5,996 cases, with 3,752 new filings in the past month. In contrast, there were fewer than 200 cases pending as of June 2023.
The court has offered helpful responses to common queries about initiating a hair relaxer product lawsuit under case MDL 23-cv-00818. One of the main companies whose chemical hair relaxer is being sued, Dabur International (which owns Namaste Laboratories), has recently switched its legal representation. Previously defended by the law firm Kirkland & Ellis LLC (who also led the defense in the 3M earplug case), Dabur has now opted for a new set of attorneys from the law firm Baker & McKenzie LLP.
A Master Complaint has been introduced in the multidistrict litigation (MDL), offering a standard document that all parties suing can refer to in their lawsuits. On the same day, 36 new cases were added to the MDL, bringing the total number of pending cases to 275. While this is a decrease from the previous month’s 87 new cases, such declines are typical for mid-summer.
Judge Rowland approved an official Short Form Complaint (SFC) for future lawsuits involving chemical hair relaxers and cancer. This standardized form will simplify the process, making it easier for new cases to be filed directly in the class action MDL.
The number of cases of the hair relaxer MDL reached 236, a significant increase from the initial 21 cases. Last month alone saw 87 new cases added, and this surge is expected to continue.
Defendants proposed to bifurcate discovery, focusing first on general causation or whether hair relaxers actually cause cancer. This move is frowned upon as it could slow down case progress and is not standard practice in multidistrict litigation. The judge is unlikely to grant this request.
In the past month, 25 new hair relaxer lawsuits joined the MDL, increasing the total pending cases to 149. Created with just 21 cases, the MDL is anticipated to see a dramatic rise in new filings soon.
The defendants are pushing for a phased discovery process that starts with establishing a link between chemical hair relaxers and cancer. The plaintiffs strongly oppose this, arguing that it will unnecessarily delay the case proceedings.
A Boston University School of Public Health study linked chemical hair straighteners to fertility decline. The study, which focused especially on Black, Hispanic, and mixed-race individuals, adds to existing concerns about the health risks of such products.
It can take anywhere from a few months to several years for a hair relaxer lawsuit to reach a conclusion. The timeline for resolving a hair relaxer lawsuit can vary widely depending on various factors, such as the complexity of the case and the court’s schedule.
The defendants in hair relaxer lawsuits are often the manufacturers of the hair relaxer products and parent companies or distributors involved in their sales. Legal actions may also target retailers or advertising agencies that promote the hair relaxer products themselves.
Yes, it’s highly recommended to consult with a lawyer who specializes in mass tort or product liability cases to file a hair relaxer lawsuit. You can find such lawyers through referrals, legal directories, or by researching firms that have experience with hair relaxer cancer lawsuit cases.
You can locate an attorney experienced in hair relaxer lawsuits by simply filling out our contact form. Our team will swiftly contact you and connect you with a specialist in this area. Reach out to us today for assistance with your case.
