Hair Relaxer and Straightener Class Action Lawsuit Update September 2024

The FDA has postponed a proposed ban on formaldehyde in hair relaxers until at least September 2024, despite its known cancer risks. Meanwhile, the hair relaxer MDL continues to progress, with discovery efforts ongoing as defendants negotiate search terms for document production. There has been a slight increase in MDL cases, with new filings and a few significant lawsuits, including one from a Michigan woman alleging cancer due to hair relaxer use. Insurers and defendants are also involved in complex legal maneuvers, including attempts to avoid coverage responsibilities. Overall, the MDL has seen a minor uptick in cases, with a slow but steady growth and ongoing discovery disputes.

September 17, 2024

• L’Oréal Discovery Dispute Continues: Plaintiffs are pressing L’Oréal USA to comply with court orders to produce documents from its parent company, L’Oréal S.A. Plaintiffs argue L’Oréal USA is improperly re-litigating the issue of control over these documents, despite previous court rulings.

September 16, 2024

• New Hair Relaxer Lawsuit Filed: A Tennessee woman has filed a lawsuit against L’Oréal and others, claiming their hair relaxer products caused her endometrial cancer and uterine fibroids. The plaintiff alleges negligence, strict liability, and other causes of action, seeking compensatory and punitive damages.

September 12, 2024:

• Fee Allocation Proposal: Plaintiffs’ Leadership Committee proposes a "common benefit fee holdback" to compensate attorneys whose work benefits all plaintiffs in the MDL, even those with cases outside the MDL. The proposal includes an 8% holdback on attorneys' fees and a 3% holdback on client recoveries for MDL expenses.

September 5, 2024:

• JPMS Motion to Dismiss Challenged: Plaintiffs oppose John Paul Mitchell Systems' (JPMS) motion to dismiss, arguing that all allegations in the complaint are relevant to JPMS. Plaintiffs assert they have standing due to alleged injuries and contest JPMS's challenges regarding the factual basis of the claims.

September 3, 2024:

• Significant Increase in MDL Cases: Over 200 new cases were added to the hair relaxer class action MDL in August, marking the highest monthly volume of new cases in several months. The total number of pending cases now stands at 8,489.

August 27, 2024:

• Litigation Update: A joint status report highlights several pending motions, progress on cases against new defendants, ongoing discovery issues with various defendants (including Revlon), and efforts to finalize search terms for electronic discovery.

August 26, 2024:

• Revlon Faces Compliance Issues: Plaintiffs' lawyers express frustration with Revlon's compliance with pretrial discovery and file a motion to compel them to meet their obligations. The plaintiffs request a court order for Revlon to complete document review and production by September 15, 2024, and suggest potential sanctions for non-compliance.

August 26, 2024:

• Walmart and CVS Excluded from Hair Relaxer Master Complaint: The Plaintiffs Leadership Committee (PLC) informs Judge Rowland that they will not include Walmart or CVS as defendants in the Master Complaint due to their limited involvement in the litigation. Individuals seeking to pursue hair relaxer lawsuits against these retailers will need to manually add them as defendants on their Short Form Complaints.

August 20, 2024:

• Motion to Dismiss Non-Cancer Hair Relaxer Lawsuits: Plaintiffs' lawyers request the dismissal without prejudice of all non-ovarian, uterine, or endometrial cancer lawsuits in the MDL. This move aims to address cases initially filed under the assumption of specific gynecological cancers that later proved incorrect. While plaintiffs seek to preserve the possibility of refiling if warranted, defendants oppose this, wanting those claims permanently dismissed. If no agreement is reached, the court will hold a hearing and issue a ruling, likely in September.

August 16, 2024:

• Case Management Conference Scheduled: The next case management conference for the hair relaxer MDL is scheduled for August 29, 2024.

August 5, 2024:

• Discovery Battles in Hair Relaxer MDL: Plaintiffs file a motion to enforce prior court orders against L’Oréal USA Inc. and its affiliates regarding their control over the parent company, L’Oréal S.A., for discovery purposes. The plaintiffs argue that L’Oréal USA is attempting to narrow the scope of the court's previous rulings, which established L’Oréal USA's control over relevant documents, including those concerning non-domestic hair relaxer products.

August 1, 2024:

• Slow Growth in Hair Relaxer MDL: The hair relaxer class action MDL experiences a minor increase of about a dozen new cases in July, bringing the total number of pending cases slightly above 8,200. 

July 25, 2024:

• FDA Delays Proposed Ban on Formaldehyde in Hair Relaxers: A proposal by federal regulators to ban formaldehyde and other harmful chemicals in hair relaxer products has been postponed until at least September. This second delay comes despite undeniable links between these chemicals and increased cancer risks. The proposed ban, initially put forward by the FDA in October 2023, reflects growing awareness of the dangers posed by hazardous chemicals in beauty products, particularly formaldehyde, a known carcinogen linked to respiratory problems and cancer.

July 22, 2024:

• Discovery Progress in Hair Relaxer MDL: Hair relaxer lawyers submit a Joint ESI Discovery Status Report detailing ongoing negotiations on search methodologies for electronic document production. Plaintiffs' attorneys request that defendants begin reviewing documents identified by agreed-upon search terms to expedite the process.

Progress varies among defendants:

• • Avlon Industries: Discussing around 460 search terms, with finalization expected by the end of July.
  • House of Cheatham: Collaborating on search terms, with plaintiffs urging immediate production of relevant documents.
  • L'Oréal USA: Nearing agreement on search terms and custodians.
  • Luster Products: Addressing issues related to legacy backup tapes.
  • McBride Research Laboratories: Negotiations ongoing, with search terms proposed and further discussions planned.
  • Namaste Laboratories: Significant progress on search terms, with a hit report expected by July 17th.
  • Revlon: Agreed on 109 search terms, with document reviews expected to start by August 1st.
  • Sally Beauty Supply: Documents being produced on a rolling basis under an agreed TAR Protocol.
  • Strength of Nature: Agreed on 207 search terms, negotiations continue for the remaining terms.

July 15, 2024:

• Slight Increase in Hair Relaxer MDL Cases: The hair relaxer class action in federal court sees a marginal increase, with cases rising from 8,170 in June to 8,192 in July. This is attributed to a decrease in victims seeking legal representation and a renewed interest in filing lawsuits in state courts, particularly in Illinois.

July 11, 2024:

• New Michigan Hair Relaxer Lawsuit Filed: A Michigan woman files a new hair relaxer lawsuit in the MDL, alleging her endometrial cancer diagnosis in February 2021 resulted from using chemical hair relaxer and straightener products manufactured by L'Oréal, Strength of Nature, and Luster Products.

July 4, 2024:

• Insurer Seeks Exemption in Hair Relaxer Cancer MDL: Selective Way Insurance requests a Georgia federal judge to exempt it from defending House of Cheatham, a defendant in the cancer-causing hair relaxers MDL. The insurer argues that a 2021 asset transfer by House of Cheatham did not include a transfer of insurance coverage, as Selective Way did not consent to the assignment of the policies.
  

July 1, 2024:

• Hair Relaxer Cancer MDL Growth Slows: The Hair Relaxer Cancer MDL sees a minor increase in active cases, rising from 8,170 in June to 8,192 in July, indicating a slowdown in the filing of new lawsuits.
  

June 28, 2024:

• Fact Sheets Deadline Extension Motion: A group of plaintiffs files a motion for a 60-day extension to provide substantially complete Plaintiff Fact Sheets to the defendants. Failure to comply with this extension would result in the dismissal without prejudice of each listed plaintiff's case for one year.
  

June 27, 2024:

• L’Oréal, SoftSheen-Carson, and Strength of Nature Lose Appeal: The Georgia Appeals Court allows Kiara Burroughs' chemical hair relaxer lawsuit to proceed in state court, rejecting the defendants' motion to dismiss based on federal preemption and statute of limitations arguments. The lawsuit alleges that the companies failed to warn the public about toxic chemicals in their products that can cause uterine fibroids.
  

June 13, 2024:

• Court Appoints Special Master: The court appoints Professor Maura R. Grossman as a special master in the hair relaxer MDL. Professor Grossman will assist in the discovery process and provide recommendations to the court.

June 3, 2024:

• Hair Relaxer Lawsuit Update: Non-Cancer Cases Dropped: The number of pending cases in the hair relaxer class action MDL has decreased by nearly 300, now totaling 8,170. This reduction is due to plaintiffs choosing not to pursue cases involving non-cancer injuries.
  

May 22, 2024:

• Revlon Bankruptcy Impacts Hair Relaxer Litigation: A hearing scheduled for May 30th in bankruptcy court will address Revlon's bankruptcy status, a key issue in the lawsuit. The decision will affect at least 177 hair relaxer cases and could impact the overall litigation strategy.
  

May 5, 2024:

• Hair Relaxer Lawsuits Enter Discovery Phase: Thousands of lawsuits against L'Oréal, Strength of Nature, Revlon, and Soft Sheen, alleging their chemical hair straighteners cause cancer, are now in the crucial discovery stage. Parties are working to facilitate the exchange of relevant information.
  

May 2, 2024:

• FDA Misses Formaldehyde Ban Deadline: The FDA has missed its deadline to propose a ban on formaldehyde in hair-straightening products, despite concerns about its link to cancer, particularly among Black women. The agency has not provided an explanation for the delay.
  

2024 Overview:

March 2024: 

• Manufacturers Seek Dismissal of Lawsuits: Manufacturers of popular hair relaxer brands like Dark & Lovely, Just for Me, and Optimum have filed a motion to dismiss a major class action lawsuit. They argue that the claims lack concrete proof of injury and that federal regulations nullify the plaintiffs' demand for economic damages.

February 2024: 

• MDL Adds 200 More Cases: 191 new cases were added to the hair relaxer class action MDL in January, bringing the total pending cases to 8,217. This indicates a slowing growth rate compared to the previous summer.
  
  

January 2024:

• MDL Passes 8,000 Cases: The hair relaxer class action MDL surpassed 8,000 pending cases within a year of its creation, highlighting the widespread concern over the alleged link between chemical hair straighteners and cancer.

Untangling the risks behind smooth strands

You've got your hair care routine down to a fine art, haven't you? Those bottles and tubs promising silky, smooth locks might as well bear your name. But amidst the sheen and the straight, a murmur has grown into a conversation that's hard to ignore — the hidden cost of that salon-fresh look, and we're not talking about the hit to your wallet.

But, when we lift the lid off those sleek bottles of hair relaxers, we find more than just beauty promises—we find endocrine disrupting chemicals (EDCs). These sneaky substances, whether they're whipped up in a lab or occur naturally, have the potential to wreak havoc on our hormone systems. They can mimic or mess with our bodies in ways that could lead to some serious health conditions, including various forms of cancer.

Let's zero in on where these EDCs are hiding out:

Chemical Hair Relaxers

First up, let's talk about chemical hair relaxers. They might be your holy grail for transforming tight curls into smooth, flowing hair. The science behind them? They break down the disulfide bonds in your hair, giving you that relaxed look. But hidden in these formulas are EDCs—parabens, Bisphenol A, phthalates, metals, and even formaldehyde. These aren't just bad news; they're potential cancer triggers.

The catch is in the retouching. Every four to eight weeks, as you touch up new growth, you're not just keeping your hair straight and relaxed. You're also increasing your exposure to these EDCs, each application potentially upping your cancer risk.

Keratin Treatments

Next, let's shine a light on keratin treatments. They're the darlings of the hair world for battling frizz and boosting shine. However, many contain a formaldehyde derivative, which is a well-known EDC. When you apply heat with a flat iron, it's not just the style that's getting locked in—it's also the release of formaldehyde gas. In a salon without proper ventilation, it's not just a bad hair day; it's a health hazard.

Linking the strands: scientific studies and EDCs

The conversation around hair care has taken a serious turn. Research from the National Institutes of Health has revealed some stark realities, particularly for women who frequently use chemical hair relaxers. With over 33,000 women participating in the study, the findings are hard to ignore: using these products can more than double the risk of developing uterine cancer.

This eye-opening data comes from a comprehensive study that was published in October 2022. It showed that women who used hair relaxing chemicals more than four times annually were facing risks that were not just numbers on a page, but tangible threats to their health. And the concerns don't stop at uterine cancer; ovarian cancer is also part of this unsettling picture. Another group of 40,559 women were observed over six years, revealing a concerning link between the frequent use of hair relaxers and a higher likelihood of developing ovarian cancer.

These studies cast a spotlight on Endocrine Disrupting Chemicals (EDCs), like parabens and formaldehyde, which are suspected of playing a significant role in this increased cancer risk. It turns out that the scalp's unique permeability may be giving these hazardous substances a more direct route into the body, amplifying the potential harm.

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is taking note. As of an October 2023 report, there's talk of banning formaldehyde from hair-straightening products, with the possibility of new regulations coming as soon as April 2024. This move is about protecting consumers from the negative effects that have been linked to such chemicals, which include not only cancer risks but also uterine fibroids, allergic reactions, respiratory issues, and fertility concerns.

Particularly alarming is the disproportionate risk these products pose to Black women, a group often targeted by hair straightening product marketing. The FDA is laying the groundwork for change and is actively dispelling myths through outreach, like their Instagram account, to keep the public informed.

Supporting this are findings from Boston University, published in October 2023, which demonstrated that Black women who used hair relaxers more than twice a year for over five years faced a significant increase in uterine cancer risk.

If the FDA's proposed regulations become final, they will be part of the Federal Register and the Code of Federal Regulations, marking a significant step toward healthier beauty practices and greater consumer safety.

Tying it all together

Let's take a moment to walk in someone else's shoes. Picture Jennifer Mitchell, a young woman at 32, who was handed a life-changing diagnosis of uterine cancer, leading her down the path to a major surgery — a hysterectomy. She decided to take legal action against not just one, but five hair relaxer companies, including the well-known L’Oreal USA. The heart of her claim? The very chemical hair relaxers she'd been using since 2000 might have been the culprits behind her illness. 

There's a growing number of lawsuits like Jennifer's, where individuals are challenging major brands, claiming that some hair relaxing products contain risky chemicals — like formaldehyde — which could increase the risk of a range of cancers, including those affecting the uterus, the lining of the uterus (endometrial), and the ovaries.

It's essential to remember that the beauty products you pick should be allies to your well-being, not threats. If you or someone close to you has used chemical-based hair treatments for straightening or relaxing and later faced cancer or another grave health issue, there might be a path to financial relief. Your health and safety should always come first, and when they're compromised, seeking the compensation you deserve is a step toward justice. 

____________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Mass torts vs. class actions at a glance

When we're talking about mass tort and class action lawsuits, we're discussing two distinct legal approaches used to handle claims where many individuals are harmed by the same entity or event.

Mass tort lawsuits are a way to handle legal cases where many individuals have been harmed, but each person's situation is distinct. Think of it like a neighborhood where every house has different damage after a storm. In a mass tort, each homeowner would file their own lawsuit, but because the storm is the common factor, the court groups the lawsuits together to manage them more efficiently. The key here is that each person retains their own case and has a say in how it's settled, which reflects their unique damages.

In contrast, class action lawsuits and class action settlements bring people together under a single legal action. It's as if the whole neighborhood decided to sue the storm together, with one or a few neighbors representing everyone's interests. Here, individual control is limited. The representative, known as the lead plaintiff, along with their legal team, makes decisions that affect the entire group. When it comes to the payout, it's typically split evenly, or based on a formula that applies to all members.

What's best for you?

Let's quickly sum up the main points to help you decide which legal route could work better for your situation:

• Control: More personal control in mass torts; limited control in class actions.

• Compensation: Individualized in mass torts; uniform in class actions.

• Applicability: Mass torts fit for varied individual damages; class actions for uniform damages across the group.

• Efficiency: Class actions can be quicker and use fewer resources by combining claims.

So, if you're part of a group that's been wronged and you're thinking about legal action, consider these points. Do you need to maintain control over your case, or are you okay with a representative taking the lead? Do your damages require individual attention, or are they similar enough to others to share in a collective claim? Your answers will help determine whether a mass tort or a class action is the best route for your situation.