If you or a loved one were diagnosed with uterine cancer, ovarian cancer or breast cancer after using a chemical hair straightener or hair relaxer product, you may be entitled to recover compensation from a hair straightener cancer lawsuit case or settlement claim.
A team of products liability injury lawyers and class action attorneys is investigating potential lawsuit and settlement cases of individuals who were diagnosed with uterine cancer, ovarian cancer or breast cancer after using chemical hair straightener or hair relaxer products.
A chemical hair relaxer is a type of cream or lotion used by women with very curly hair or tight curls to help break down chemical bonds of the hair shaft to allow the hair to be more easily straightened.
Unfortunately, according to a recent National Institutes of Health (NIH) study, women who frequently used chemical hair straightening products may be at an increased risk of developing certain cancers such as uterine cancer, endometrial cancer, ovarian cancer and breast cancer.
Hair Straightener Cancer Lawsuit Cases
Hair straightener lawsuit and settlement cases potentially being investigated include claims of individuals who frequently used chemical hair relaxer or hair straightening products (a/k/a lanthionization) and suffered serious injuries or complications including:
The hair straightening cancer injury lawsuits filed in federal district court were consolidated and/or transferred into a multi-district litigation or MDL for coordinated pretrial proceedings, styled as In Re: Hair Relaxer Marketing, Sales Practices and Products Liability Litigation, MDL Case No. 3060, 1:23-cv-00818, United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois (Judge Mary M. Rowland).
Defendants in the hair straightener lawsuits have included L’Oréal USA, Inc., L’Oréal USA Products, Inc., Strength of Nature, LLC, Strength of Nature Global, LLC , Soft Sheen/Carson Inc., Soft-Sheen Carson LLC, Soft Sheen Carson (W.I.), Inc., Dabur USA, Inc., Revlon, Inc., Namaste Laboratories, LLC, Godrej Son Holdings, Inc., Godrej Consumer Products, Ltd., PDC Brands, Parfums De Coeur, Ltd., Avlon Industries Inc., AFAM Concept, Inc. d/b/a JF Labs, Sally Beauty Holdings, Inc., Luster Products, Inc., McBride Research Laboratories, Inc., Beauty Bell Enterprises, LLC d/b/a House of Cheatham, Inc., and House of Cheatham, LLC, among others.
The hair relaxer lawsuits allege, among other things, that chemical hair relaxer products were manufactured, marketed, and/or sold that may have contained endocrine disrupting chemicals or EDCs (such as phthalates) which allegedly can have an adverse impact on female reproductive systems and can potentially lead to an increased risk of women developing uterine fibroids, endometriosis, reproductive dysfunction and infertility, and various cancers, including uterine cancer.
Hair Relaxer Lawsuit Injury Claims
Hair relaxer lawsuit injury claims potentially being investigated include those involving the following hair relaxing brands and treatments:
- Dark and Lovely
- Optimum Care Relaxer
- Mizani Scalp Relaxer
- SoftSheen Hair Straighteners
- L’Oréal Hair Relaxers
- Just for Me Hair Relaxer
- Motions Hair Relaxer
- Soft and Beautiful Texturizer or Relaxer
- TCB
- TCB Naturals Relaxer Creme
- Profectiv Mega Growth No-Lye Relaxer
- African Pride Relaxer
- African Pride Dream Kids
- Dr. Miracle
- Strength of Nature Hair Relaxers
- ORS Olive Oil (Organic Root Stimulator)
- Dabur Hair Straighteners
- Namaste Salon System
- Dermoviva Skin Essentials
- Cantu Shea Butter Relaxer
- PDC Hair Relaxers
- Africa’s Best Relaxer
- House of Cheatham Hair Relaxers
- Hawaiian Silky
- Vitale
- Texture My Way
- Bantu
- Care Free Curl
- Look of Radiance
- Ultra Precise
- UltraSheen
- ShortLooks Colorlaxer
- Arosci Aromaphoric
- All Ways Natural
- Gentle Treatment
- SmartPerm
- Elasta QP
- Pro-Line Comb Thru Texturizer
- S&B Botanicals
- JF Labs Hair Relaxer
- Pink
- Smooth Touch
- Luster Hair Straighteners
- Luster’s Pretty N Silky (PCJ)
- Affirm
- Avlon Hair Relaxer
- Design Essentials
- McBride Research Hair Straighteners
- Silk Elements Shea Butter Relaxer
- Sally Beauty Hair Relaxers
- Crème of Nature Argan Oil Relaxer
- Revlon Realistic
- Revlon Hair Relaxers
- Isoplus No-Lye Conditioning Relaxer
- Precise Relaxer
- Fabu-Laxer
- Brazilian blowout
- Keratin
- Other hair relaxer lawsuit claims
Hair Relaxer Lawsuit & Settlement Updates
Recent updates about hair relaxer lawsuits and settlements include:
- March 2024: As of March 1, 2024, more than 8,300 hair relaxer lawsuits are pending in the federal hair straightener MDL case.
- January 2024: As of January 2, 2024, there were more than 8,000 hair relaxer lawsuits pending in the federal hair relaxer MDL case.
- November 2023: On November 13, 2023 the Court granted in part and denied in part Defendants’ joint Motion to Dismiss. The Court found that Defendants failed to meet their burden to show that certain of plaintiffs’ claims were preempted by the Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (“FDCA”). The Court further found that plaintiffs had sufficiently stated claims for negligence, design defect, failure to warn, unfair conduct, breach of warranty, unjust enrichment, punitive damages and various derivative claims such as wrongful death, survival action, and loss of consortium claims. Finally, the Court dismissed certain fraud-based claims on the basis that plaintiffs did not meet the heightened pleading standard for such fraud-based claims.
- October 2023: A status hearing in the hair relaxer litigation was held on October 2, 2023 regarding variouos discovery issues. Another hearing has been scheduled for November 17, 2023.
- September 2023: On September 13, 2023 the Court entered a case management order governing all cases filed in, transferred to, or removed to the Chemical Hair Relaxer MDL, including the filing of short form complaints, answers and service of process.
- August 2023: On August 1, 2023 the plaintiffs filed a proposed short form complaint. On August 3, 2023 the Court adopted the Proposed Short Form Complaint. A copy of the template Short Form Complaint can be downloaded from the Court’s webpage for MDL 3060. On August 4, 2023, Plaintiffs filed a memorandum in opposition to defendants motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim. On August 21, additional defendants filed a motion to dismiss the complaint or join in Defendants’ Joint Motion to Dismiss. On August 23, 2023 the Court held a status hearing regarding the various motions to dismiss, discovery issues, and depositions, among other things.
Older Hair Relaxer Lawsuit & Settlement Updates
- July 2023: On July 5, 2023 certain defendants filed a motion to dismiss. On July 6, 2023 the Court held a status hearing to address various matters raised in the parties’ joint status reports. On July 14, 2023 the Court held a video status hearing.
- May 2023: On May 15, 2023 Plaintiffs filed a Master Long Form Complaint along with a sample template Short Form Complaint and Jury Demand. On May 18, 2023, the Court held a telephonic hearing on the parties’ Joint Status Report addressing proposed orders. On May 31, 2023, the Court held a status hearing regarding, among other things, pleading deadlines, initial discovery disclosures, and a potential Science Day.
- April 2023: On April 14, 2023 the Parties filed another joint status report. On April 18, 2023, the Court held an in person status hearing regarding deadlines, the filing of a master complaint, issues of causation, various proposed orders regarding preservation, electronically stored information or ESI, confidentiality, claw-back provisions, and privilege logs, among other things.
- March 2023: On March 2, 2023 the Court held an initial status hearing in the hair relaxer MDL. On March 10, 2023, the Parties filed a joint status report regarding various proposed deadlines for pleadings/amending complaints, probate matters, direct filing of cases, issues relating to causation, federal and state court coordination, and preservation and protective orders, among other things.
- February 2023: On February 6, 2023 the United States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation entered a Transfer Order transferring certain hair relaxer lawsuits pending in various federal courts to the Honorable Mary M. Rowland in the Northern District of Illinois for coordinated or consolidated pretrial proceedings.
Time Is Limited To File A Hair Relaxer Lawsuit
Deadlines called statutes of limitation and statutes of repose may limit the amount of time that women have to file a hair relaxer lawsuit to try to recover compensation for injuries they claim to have suffered (such as uterine or endometrial cancer, ovarian cancer and/or breast cancer, among others) after using chemical hair straightening products.
This means that if a hair straightener lawsuit claim is not filed before the applicable time limit or deadline, the injured party may be barred from ever taking legal action or pursuing litigation regarding their hair relaxer injury claim. That is why it is important to connect with a hair relaxer injury lawyer or attorney as soon as possible.
If you or a loved one were diagnosed with cancer after using a chemical hair relaxer or hair straightener, you may be entitled to recover compensation from a hair relaxer cancer lawsuit case or settlement claim. Contact a products liability injury lawyer to request a free hair relaxer case review. Time is limited.
*If you or a loved one are experiencing health issues, side effects or complications from a product, we urge you to promptly consult with your doctor or physician for an evaluation.
**The listing of a company (e.g., L’Oréal, Nature Global, Strength of Nature Global, Carson d/b/a Soft Sheen, Revlon, PDC, House of Cheatham, Godrej, Isoplus, Parfums De Coeur, Dabur, Avlon Industries, AFAM Concept, Inc. d/b/a JF Labs, Sally Beauty Holdings, Inc., McBride Research Laboratories, Inc., Luster Products, Inc., Beauty Bell and Namaste Laboratories, etc.) is not meant to state or imply that the company acted illegally or improperly or that the product (e.g., hair relaxer) is unsafe or defective; rather only that an investigation may be, is or was being conducted to determine whether legal rights have been violated.
***The use of any trademarks, tradenames or service marks is solely for product identification and/or informational purposes.
Fill out the form for a free attorney review.