Hair relaxer lawsuit settlement for chemical cancer victims

Hair Relaxer Lawsuit

The Hair Relaxer Lawsuit has been filed in all 50 states. You may qualify for compensation if you have been diagnosed with Ovarian Cancer, Uterine Cancer, or Endometrial Cancer.

  • Cancer Lawsuits

Last Update

lawsuitlike
lawsuitlike
lawsuitlike

Hair Relaxer Lawsuit Updates
image_line

Connecticut Woman Files Hair Relaxer Lawsuit Alleging Decades of Use Caused Uterine Cancer

A Connecticut resident has filed a new lawsuit within the Hair Relaxer MDL (MDL 3060). The plaintiff alleges that using chemical hair relaxers for nearly forty years, from before 1980 until approximately 2020, caused her uterine cancer diagnosis in 1988. The complaint names major manufacturers as defendants, including L’Oréal, Revlon, SoftSheen-Carson, and Strength of Nature. It specifically cites products like Dark and Lovely, Just for Me, and Revlon Realistic, asserting they contained endocrine-disrupting chemicals and were marketed without adequate cancer risk warnings. The suit adopts the MDL master complaint's causes of action: strict liability (design defect, failure to warn), negligent misrepresentation, breach of warranty, fraudulent concealment, and consumer protection claims. The plaintiff seeks compensatory and punitive damages, plus loss of consortium.

Hair Relaxer MDL Case Count Rises to 10,567, Reversing Prior Decline

The hair relaxer multidistrict litigation (MDL 3060) before Judge Mary M. Rowland in the Northern District of Illinois now encompasses 10,567 pending cases—a net increase of 285 since July 1, 2024. This rebound reverses last month’s decline and signals sustained momentum, driven by new filings and administrative adjustments (e.g., voluntary dismissals of weak claims). The latent nature of uterine and ovarian cancers linked to chemical relaxers means women continue connecting prolonged product exposure to their diagnoses years later. As the MDL advances through discovery, the growing docket underscores its ongoing expansion phase, with focus shifting to expert challenges and causation debates. While no bellwether trials are scheduled, the trajectory confirms robust plaintiff engagement heading into critical Q4 procedural milestones.

Court Denies Revlon's NIH Subpoena in Hair Relaxer MDL, Protecting Trial Timeline

Judge Mary Rowland rejected Revlon’s request to subpoena the National Institutes of Health (NIH) for internal documents—including draft studies, workpapers, and communications—related to research linking hair relaxers to cancer. The court ruled the demand imposed undue burden and risked significant discovery delays in the 10,567-case MDL. This decision preserves the litigation’s momentum toward bellwether trials, preventing Revlon from challenging epidemiological evidence connecting chemical relaxers to uterine and breast cancers. The ruling benefits plaintiffs by maintaining focus on core scientific disputes. Women diagnosed with hormone-related cancers after prolonged relaxer use may still file claims against manufacturers.

Court Blocks Revlon’s Subpoena for NIH Internal Files in Hair Relaxer Litigation

Judge Mary Rowland denied Revlon’s motion to enforce a subpoena against the National Institutes of Health (NIH), which sought internal communications, drafts, and work papers behind hair relaxer cancer studies—including exchanges between NIH scientists and plaintiffs’ lawyers. Revlon aimed to challenge the science underpinning the MDL, but the NIH invoked deliberative process privilege. The court ruled Revlon failed to justify overriding this privilege, noting the NIH’s non-party status and Revlon’s adequate access to raw study data. The denial prevents defense discovery into agency deliberations, preserving focus on published science. Revlon, in bankruptcy since its 2023 Chapter 11 restructuring (which eliminated $2.7B+ debt), relies on insurers as the real parties in interest for these claims.

About the Hair Relaxer Lawsuit

Hair relaxer lawsuits have been brought by thousands of claimants. Studies have shown a relationship between chemical hair relaxers and cancer. These cancers include ovarian, uterine, and breast cancers. Scientific research suggests that chemicals in hair relaxers may be a contributing factor to uterine fibroids and uterine cancer. According to these studies, women who use certain hair relaxers are more than twice as likely to develop uterine cancer.


Many big-name companies, such as L’Oreal, are being sued due to the potential harm their products have caused to many women. The Hair Relaxer lawsuit alleges that hair relaxer products contain chemicals that may cause uterine cancer. Hair relaxer products are predominately used by African-American women.


Hair relaxer products contain harmful chemicals known as phthalates, also known as endocrine-disrupting chemicals (EDCs), which may cause issues with natural hormone production. These chemicals may enter the body when used on the scalp and can alter hormone levels. Using these products may lead to many health issues, such as endometriosis, uterine fibroids and different cancer types. The chemical can also harm the immune system and cause ovarian cancer.
 

What is The Difference Between Class Action Lawsuits and Multi-District Litigation (MDL)?

Class action lawsuits and multi-district litigation (MDL) are both legal mechanisms used to handle a large number of lawsuits that share common issues, but they operate differently. 


In a class action lawsuit, a small group of plaintiffs represents a larger group against a defendant. This method is efficient when individual lawsuits would be impractical due to the large number of plaintiffs. The outcome of a class action lawsuit, whether it's a court decision or a settlement, applies to all members.


On the other hand, MDL consolidate individual but related civil cases from different federal districts into a single district for pretrial proceedings. This process is often used in complex cases like product liability suits. In MDLs, like the hair relaxer lawsuit, each plaintiff retains their individual lawsuit, and outcomes or settlements are handled individually even though the pretrial process is combined.
 

Why Are the Hair Relaxer Lawsuits Consolidated Into an MDL?

The hair relaxer lawsuit is considered an MDL because the varied injuries, potential contributing factors, and unique medical histories of each plaintiff necessitate a more flexible approach. This allows for individualized assessments of damages, liability arguments based on specific cases, and tailored discovery while still achieving efficiency through shared pre-trial procedures.

How to Pre-Qualify for the Hair Relaxer Lawsuit

To pre-qualify for the hair relaxer lawsuit, individuals must meet specific criteria related to the use of certain hair relaxer products and the subsequent development of certain cancers:
Pre-Qualifying Injuries:

  • Uterine Cancer
  • Endometrial Cancer
  • Ovarian Cancer
  • Uterine Fibroids
  • & Other Pre-Qualifying Cancers

 

Hair Relaxer Products Linked:

  • Dark & Lovely
  • Just for Me
  • Motions
  • Africa's Best
  • African Pride
  • Bantu
  • Creme of Nature
  • Luster's
  • Mizani Rhelaxer
  • TCB or TCB Naturals
  • Ultra Precise
  • Ultra Sheen Supreme
  • Elite Bristo
  • Optimum
  • Soft & Beautiful

 

We encourage you to seek legal advice to determine your eligibility. Various factors impact eligibility and all cases are unique.

 

While you will need to speak to an attorney to determine eligibility, claimants must typically provide concrete evidence of their use of one or more of the specified hair relaxer products. This documentation can include purchase receipts, photographs, or testimonies that clearly demonstrate a history of using these products. 

 

Additionally, claimants must typically have a medically confirmed diagnosis of one of the specified cancers: Uterine Cancer, Endometrial Cancer, or Ovarian Cancer. Medical records, such as diagnostic reports, treatment records, and statements from healthcare professionals, are crucial in substantiating this aspect of the process. 

 

The combination of proof of product usage and a relevant medical diagnosis forms the cornerstone of establishing a direct link required for potential eligibility in the hair relaxer lawsuit.

What Brands Are Being Investigated in the Hair Relaxer Lawsuit?

Several manufacturers and their respective products are commonly implicated in the hair relaxer lawsuit, including:

  • L’Oreal - manufacturer of Dark & Lovely, Ultra Sheen, and other chemical hair products
  • Strength of Nature Global, LLC - manufacturer of Motions
  • Namaste, LLC - manufacturer of ORS Olive Oil Hair Relaxer
  • TCB Naturals/Godrej Consumer Products - manufacturer of Just For Me

 

What Are Your Next Steps?

If you or a loved one has been affected by Hair Relaxers or other products, now is the time to take action. Thousands of women are seeking justice for the harm they’ve suffered, and you may be entitled to compensation.

 

Joining a class action lawsuit is about more than obtaining a settlement. It’s also about holding these companies accountable for the products they sell. 

 

Join a Class Action Lawsuit

The potential dangers of Hair Relaxers have left many individuals feeling betrayed and uncertain about their future and health. 

 

If you’ve used Hair Relaxers and are now facing health issues, you’re not alone. Class action lawsuits offer a way to seek justice and compensation for the suffering and associated risks of using Hair Relaxers. 

 

Don’t wait. Consult with your doctor, explore your legal options, and take steps to protect your rights. We encourage you to start the process of finding out if you may qualify for a Hair Relaxer class action lawsuit. We can help you stay informed and provide you with the latest updates regarding the lawsuit. Subscribe to OnlyClassActions for further details. 


Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)

The hair relaxer lawsuits allege that companies, including L’Oréal, failed to warn consumers about the risks of their products, leading to health issues like uterine cancer from chemicals like phthalates. The lawsuits argue that the companies knew of these dangers but continued to sell the products, prioritizing profit over consumer safety and neglecting their duty to inform users about potential carcinogens.

Yes, the hair relaxer lawsuits highlight that these products were predominantly marketed to Black women, underscoring concerns about their disproportionate exposure to potentially harmful chemicals. This focus sheds light on issues of race, health, and corporate responsibility, suggesting that the marketing to Black women overlooked their specific health risks. The case emphasizes the importance of inclusivity and safety in product development and marketing, raising broader questions about health equity and the ethical responsibilities of personal care companies.

Several chemicals found in hair relaxer products are suspected to be carcinogenic, raising concerns about their potential health risks. These include: · Formaldehyde: Often used in hair products for its preservative and straightening properties, formaldehyde has been classified as a carcinogen. · Parabens: Commonly used as preservatives in cosmetics, parabens can mimic estrogen and have been linked to cancer risk. · Heavy Metals: Certain hair relaxers contain heavy metals, which, with prolonged exposure, can have toxic effects and potentially contribute to cancer development. · Endocrine-Disrupting Chemicals like Phthalates: These chemicals, found in many personal care products, can interfere with hormone function and are linked to various health issues, including cancer.

Chemical relaxers, often used by individuals with natural hair, can lead to a variety of side effects. These range from relatively minor issues like dandruff and hair loss to more serious conditions such as endometriosis and cancer. Currently, there are no available hair straightening products that offer a permanent solution and are entirely chemical-free.

This is an advertisement. OnlyClassActions is not a law firm or referral service, and we do not provide legal advice. OnlyClassActions provides a free service for individuals seeking legal representation, and we do not charge you to be connected with an attorney. We do not recommend or endorse any attorneys that pay to participate. OnlyClassActions utilizes a pool of attorneys in each jurisdiction, and attorneys are selected through a round-robin process without our evaluating your legal situation when selecting which attorney will receive your information. OnlyClassActions makes no representation about the quality of legal services or the qualifications of any attorney participating in our pool. Information you submit will be shared with third-party attorney(s). An attorney-client relationship is not formed when you submit information through the form. Hiring a lawyer is a critical decision and should not be predicated solely on comments, advertisements, or other content found on any website. You are under no obligation to retain a lawyer who contacts you through this service.

Add Comment