Hair Relaxer Mass Tort Marketing Campaigns

As both sides continue preparing their cases in the hair relaxer MDL, the plaintiffs asked the court to require depositions of several current and former L’Oréal executives who are believed to have direct knowledge of the company’s Dark & Lovely hair relaxer products, including product development, safety testing, marketing, and internal discussions about potential health risks. This is part of an effort to establish what the company knew about the potential health risks of chemical hair relaxers and when it became aware of the risks.

 
The testimony may further address whether L’Oréal provided consumers with adequate warnings about the products.

 
L’Oréal has objected to some of the requested depositions, and the court is now considering the dispute.

 
The court also held a status conference over discovery involving RNA Corporation, a second-wave defendant in the MDL. Plaintiffs seek expedited discovery from RNA after it was identified by several bellwether defendants as a necessary party, or claimed unnamed necessary parties exist, without providing the factual basis plaintiffs believe is required.

 
The judge ordered the parties to submit short briefs on what happened with earlier RNA subpoenas and whether RNA should have to produce expedited discovery tied to other defendants’ necessary-party defenses. RNA must also identify when it can provide affidavits addressing whether it made or supplied hair relaxer products for certain bellwether defendants.

 
As of the start of July, there were 11,877 plaintiffs in the hair relaxer litigation, making it the fourth-largest MDL in the country.

 
Judge Mary Rowland, who is overseeing the litigation, is limiting which bellwether plaintiffs can seek certain categories of damages and requiring them to disclose those details now rather than waiting until trial. For out-of-pocket medical expenses, only four bellwether plaintiffs may pursue those damages. All others are barred from adding those claims later. For lost wages, only three bellwether plaintiffs may seek those damages. Those plaintiffs must identify what they are claiming by the court’s deadlines, including the amount of lost income and the time missed from work.

The number of active lawsuits in the hair relaxer MDL increased by nearly 200 over the past month to a total of 11,723 at the beginning of June.

 
The parties submitted a joint status report to the judge to explain their progress in discovery on the cases selected for the first bellwether trial pool. The report included explanations of what discovery items had not yet been turned in, and also asked the judge to resolve disagreements.

 
One new lawsuit in the MDL was filed by the family of a South Carolina woman alleging that decades of chemical hair relaxer use caused her ovarian and uterine cancers before her death. The woman used hair relaxer products from approximately 1994 through 2022, including Just For Me Relaxer and Complete Touch Up Relaxer.

 
The lawsuit names Godrej SON Holdings, Inc. and Strength of Nature, LLC as defendants and alleges the woman developed ovarian cancer and uterine cancer after years of exposure to the companies’ relaxer products. The complaint also includes wrongful death and survival claims on behalf of her family.

 
Plaintiffs’ lawyers are asking Judge Mary Rowland to review a ruling involving L’Oreal’s corporate deposition testimony, specifically L’Oreal’s use of the errata process after the deposition of its corporate witness, Enrico Gilberti III, Ph.D.

 
It was alleged that L’Oreal used the errata process to rewrite sworn testimony, including testimony about whether the company received and reported serious adverse events involving chemical hair relaxers. Plaintiffs say some answers were changed from “yes” to “no,” and other admissions were softened or turned into hypotheticals.

The judge overseeing the hair relaxer MDL selected ten cases that she believes are best suited to go to trial as bellwether cases, rejecting several of the cases that had been chosen by the parties. Judge Mary Rowland selected the claims she thought best represented the injuries discussed in the litigation.

 
These test cases will help gauge how juries respond to claims linking the chemical hair relaxer products to cancer and other health risks. The court also established criteria excluding certain claims from consideration, in an effort to focus on representative injuries.

 
The judge indicated the following types of cases should not be included:

-Claims involving only one or two defendants
-Plaintiffs with memory loss, mental health conditions or learning disabilities
-Plaintiffs also pursuing talcum powder cancer lawsuits involving similar reproductive cancer claims

 
The total number of lawsuits in the MDL stood at 11,526 at the beginning of May, an increase of 155 since March. These claims are being pursued by women who developed uterine cancer, endometrial cancer, ovarian cancer and other injuries linked to chemicals in the hair straighteners. They allege that cosmetics companies knew or should have known about these risks yet failed to warn users.

At the beginning of April there were 11,371 plaintiffs in the hair relaxer multi-district litigation, making it the nation’s third-largest MDL.

 
One group of 11 plaintiffs asked Judge Mary Rowland to certify several class action lawsuits seeking to require L’Oreal and other cosmetics manufacturers to pay for lifelong court-supervised medical monitoring. These claims allege that long-term users face an elevated long-term risk of developing cancer due to past exposure to the products’ chemicals. If the claims are certified, plaintiffs propose the lawsuits be resolved in a single class trial, saving the courts and parties time and expenses.

 
Judge Rowland directed the parties to prepare 32 hair relaxer cancer lawsuits for early discovery to serve as the first bellwether trials. The plaintiffs are women who have been diagnosed with uterine cancer, ovarian cancer or endometrial cancer, and allege that manufacturers failed to adequately disclose the risks associated with use of their products.

 
The first test cases involving personal injury claims are expected to be ready for trial by the second half of 2027.

 
The judge was expected to nominate three hair relaxer lawsuits to serve as bellwether cases, with plaintiffs permitted to select one of the cases for trial and defendants choosing another. The court will then repeat the process with a second group of three potential bellwether cases in which the plaintiffs and defendants will each choose one. This selection phase was expected to be completed by the end of April.

The hair relaxer MDL continued to move toward the phase of bellwether trials. The presiding judge established mid-March deadlines for lawyers on both sides to submit lists of possible lawsuits for selection as trials, and for fact discovery for the first group of cases.

 
As of March, there were 11,440 lawsuits claiming that chemicals in hair straighteners can cause serious health conditions including cancer, an increase of 245 cases from the previous month.

 
The judge said she plans to pick three bellwether cases by early April, with more selections and preparations to follow soon after. These trials will test how juries respond to the plaintiffs’ claims and to evaluate key issues such as liability, causation, and damages.

The hair relaxer MDL rose to 11,195 pending lawsuits at the start of February, an increase of 247 cases from January.

 
Progress is continuing toward the start of bellwether trials, with most of the plaintiffs having been deposed. The defendants requested an extension on discovery in order to gather enough information to decide which of the 32 bellwether cases to proceed to trial.

 
Plaintiffs do not see the need to extend discovery across all 32 bellwether cases since most will not go to trial.

 
The defendants also sent out 93 subpoenas in an effort to depose third-party witnesses, including doctors, hair stylists and family members.

At the start of January, the hair relaxer MDL had grown to 10,948 pending cases, an increase of over 100 from the previous month.

 
The judge overseeing the litigation held a status hearing on the sharing of information and set multiple deadlines for the parties. Several defendants and third parties were ordered to produce documents, data, and testimony by January 23. The judge also held that unresolved disputes should be taken to a special master.

 
In addition, a Science Day was held Jan. 8 before Judge Mary M. Rowland to give attorneys an opportunity to present scientific information including medical studies, reports, and other literature examining the possible link between hair-straightening products and some types of cancer.

Though the rate of growth has slowed in the federal hair relaxer MDL, 121 new cases were still added in November to bring the total number of plaintiffs to 10,844.

 
The next stage involves resolving scheduling conflicts for the 32 plaintiff depositions, which will be key evidence in the litigation to determine whether the defendant’s products caused their injuries. The depositions apply to the plaintiffs whose cases have been chosen as potential bellwethers.

 
A judge in New York denied a motion by Namaste Laboratories to dismiss a lawsuit filed by Mayra Garcia, who alleges that years of using the company’s hair relaxer products caused her to develop endometrial cancer. The judge allowed all claims, including design defect and failure to warn, to proceed based on allegations that the products contained endocrine-disrupting chemicals but were marketed as safe.

The number of pending lawsuits in the hair relaxer MDL in federal court grew to 10,723 at the start of November, a total that reflects the addition of 171 new cases during the previous month.

 
The litigation is progressing slowly due to disputes over discovery. Attorneys are working to resolve scheduling issues for the 32 plaintiff depositions required in the coming months.

 
A plaintiff won a legal victory at the state level in Georgia, where the state Supreme Court allowed a lawsuit to move forward involving claims that a woman was diagnosed with fibroids after using hair relaxers. The court overturned a lower court ruling that had dismissed the lawsuit against Strength of Nature and L’Oréal.

The hair relaxer MDL continues to be one of the largest in the nation with 10,552 lawsuits as of the start of October. The total is reported to be slightly down to more plaintiffs pursuing cases in state courts and the dismissal of some claims.

 
Judge Mary Rowland dismissed one case with prejudice outright while a group of others were dismissed without prejudice, following defense requests to dismiss them for noncompliance with Case Management Order 9. Those dismissed without prejudice can be refiled in the MDL if plaintiffs promptly submit complete plaintiff fact sheets and authorizations.

 
In a positive development for plaintiffs, the Georgia Supreme Court allowed a group hair relaxer lawsuit involving Strength of Nature and L’Oréal to move forward. The court overturned a ruling by a lower court that had previously dismissed the lawsuit, which involves claims that a woman was diagnosed with fibroids after using hair relaxers.

Judge Mary Rowland dismissed five plaintiffs from the hair relaxer MDL for failing to file their required Short Form Complaints by the court’s August 14 deadline, leaving a total of 10,858 active cases at the beginning of September.

 
Judge Rowland also issued a new order after recent status hearings in the case, requesting that the parties file a joint update late this month to report on all scheduled or complete depositions, as well as provide information on how the depositions are progressing. That will be followed by another in-person hearing before the judge on October 9.

 
Plaintiffs were given an extension until December 1 for expert disclosures related to general causation. Defendants were given until Jan. 6 to serve their own reports, with plaintiffs now have until January 20 to file rebuttals.

 
Magistrate Judge Beth Jantz ruled in favor of the plaintiffs in saying that Namaste must turn over an email chain it had withheld by claiming attorney-client privilege. The court reviewed the document and found the emails mostly involved a third-party consultant, not legal advice from a lawyer, and thus are not protected under privilege rules. Namaste is one of several cosmetic manufacturers facing lawsuits over toxic chemicals in its products.

The number of cases in the hair relaxer MDL rose once again after a brief decline the previous month. The total number of pending lawsuits before Judge Mary Rowland in the Northern District of Illinois stood at 10,567 at the beginning of August, an increase of 285 from July.

Judge Rowland denied a subpoena from Revlon seeking multiple documents from the National Institutes of Health that supported hair relaxer cancer studies, such as drafts of the studies, workpapers, and communications. This was seen as helpful to the plaintiffs, as the defense request would have been expected to delay lawsuits due to the time needed to retrieve the paperwork.

Among the new lawsuits in the MDL was one filed by a Connecticut woman who alleged that nearly four decades of using chemical hair relaxers led to her diagnosis of uterine cancer. She claims the products contained endocrine-disrupting chemicals that increased her risk of developing hormone-related cancers.

The plaintiff accuses the defendants, including L’Oréal, Revlon, SoftSheen-Carson, and Strength of Nature, of manufacturing and marketing products such as Dark and Lovely, Just for Me, and Revlon Realistic without adequate warnings about their risks.

In a case management order for the hair relaxer MDL, Judge Mary Rowland scheduled a Science Day for January 8, 2026. That is when experts on behalf of the plaintiffs and defendants will each have two hours to explain the medical and scientific issues involved in the case. The presentation of this information is aimed at helping the court gain a comprehensive understanding of the issues before making decisions that could impact the outcome of the case.

The court may ask questions, and judges from related state court lawsuits may attend. It is expected that the experts will be discussing research linking chemical hair relaxers to uterine cancer, fibroids, and other hormone-related injuries.

As of the start of July there were 10,282 pending cases before Judge Rowland, a drop of 35 from the previous month. Some of this is the result of cases that were filed preemptively to preserve statutes of limitations but were later withdrawn or consolidated as attorneys obtained and reviewed medical records.

At the beginning of June, the number of pending actions in the hair relaxer MDL stood at 10,317, an increase of 149 cases from the previous month.

Judge Mary Rowland ordered attorneys on both sides to submit a detailed joint status report on the status of discovery, including the scheduling of depositions and resolving disputes raised during the last conference.

Fact discovery is scheduled to run through February 2026, with general causation evidence due by March 2026. The discovery pool for the first bellwether trial includes 32 lawsuits involving women diagnosed with uterine, ovarian, or endometrial cancer.

Judge Rowland also dismissed L’Oréal SA, the French parent of L’Oréal USA, from the MDL, finding that the court lacks personal jurisdiction. But the ruling is not expected to have a significant impact on the litigation, as most of the cases do not name the French parent as a defendant, focusing instead on L’Oréal USA and its affiliated U.S. entities

232 new lawsuits were filed over the past month in the hair relaxer MDL, bringing the total to 10,168 cases as of the beginning of May.

The litigation remains in the discovery phase, with the first bellwether trial scheduled for November 3, and the second for February 2, 2026.

In Case Management Order No. 17, the court appointed Ellen K. Reisman as a Special Master to oversee and coordinate settlement negotiations in the MDL, without favoring either side. A settlement is not considered imminent, though.

The defendants filed a motion to dismiss a small group of lawsuits from the MDL, saying the cases missed a recent deadline to fix their plaintiff fact sheets.

The U.S. Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation reports that there were 9,936 hair relaxer lawsuits in the federal MDL at the beginning of the month, an increase of about 200 from March.

A case management order by Judge Rowland means that some women whose lawsuits were dismissed may have the cases reinstated. The judge said those harmed by chemical hair straighteners can submit new plaintiff fact sheets, allowing them to rejoin the lawsuit with minimal work if their claims were dismissed without prejudice due to technicalities.

One new lawsuit was filed by a Louisiana woman who alleged she developed ovarian cancer from hair relaxer products manufactured and marketed by Godrej SON Holdings, Luster Products, Namaste Laboratories,  and Strength of Nature.

A total of 9,788 pending cases were recorded in the first week of March, with 75 new cases having been added to the hair relaxer class action MDL over the course of February.

The court has issued a new order in the MDL, detailing the bellwether selection process and setting a clear timeline. By April 30, 2025, each side must select 20 cases, which will be narrowed to 32 Initial Bellwether Discovery Cases. Only cases filed by February 1, 2024, with completed Plaintiff Fact Sheets by February 28, 2025, and involving uterine, endometrial, or ovarian cancer, will qualify. Fact discovery is expected to end on February 16, 2026. Expert disclosures begin late this year, with general causation discovery closing March 2, 2026. The court will then identify 12 potential bellwether trials, later narrowed to 10.

Judge Rowland has introduced a detailed bellwether trial plan for the MDL, pushing the trial date back. The process begins with the selection and exchange of 20 Initial Bellwether Discovery Cases by April 30, 2025, and extends through January 6, 2027. By that time, replies for summary judgment motions will be due.

Meanwhile, settlement discussions continue, though plaintiffs resist the defendants’ push for a structured mediation process. Additionally, Rowland denied dismissal motions from John Paul Mitchell Systems, Wella, and Advanced Beauty.

As of this month, the MDL includes 9,819 pending cases, with 170 added last month. During the first week, both sides proposed different approaches for the bellwether trials. Plaintiffs aim to select 16 cases by February, with an anticipated September 2025 start. However, defendants proposed a more extensive selection process, which would delay trials until 2026. The judge’s decision on the timeline is forthcoming.

At the start of December, a total of 9,649 cases were recorded in the hair relaxer MDL, with 161 new cases having been filed in the previous month.

By now, the MDL has set an 11% assessment on gross recoveries—8% for attorney fees and 3% for expenses—to support litigation efforts, including discovery, expert retention, and trial preparation, while reimbursing essential case costs like depositions and document management.

Plaintiffs in the Hair Relaxer MDL claim defendants are delaying discovery by withholding key information on product ingredients and safety warnings. With missed deadlines and incomplete responses at issue, plaintiffs are pushing for a December 20, 2024, cutoff for compliance, arguing the delays jeopardize trial readiness and potential settlement discussions. A status conference Thursday could clarify next steps.

On December 16, an Illinois woman joined the Hair Relaxer MDL, alleging that prolonged use of chemical relaxers caused her uterine cancer. The lawsuit accuses major manufacturers of negligence and failure to warn consumers about endocrine-disrupting chemicals linked to hormone-related cancers, seeking damages for alleged misrepresentation and public health risks.

Since October, the MDL has surged by over 1,000 new filings, bringing the total to 9,488 cases. This significant increase reflects mounting pressure on defendants as litigation progresses, potentially influencing upcoming verdicts and settlement strategies.

October 18, 2024

A Georgia woman has filed a wrongful death lawsuit within MDL-3060, alleging that her mother’s long-term use of hair relaxer products led to a fatal uterine cancer diagnosis. The suit claims that L’Oréal USA, Inc., SoftSheen-Carson LLC, and other manufacturers negligently failed to test, design, and label these products properly, exposing consumers to harmful chemicals. The plaintiff seeks damages for wrongful death, loss of consortium, and punitive relief.