Public court records · Regulatory sources · Independently maintained Data as of: 2026-09-29 · Not legal advice

Chemical Hair Relaxer (Cancer) Lawsuit

US MDL Consolidated Last verified 2026-09-01

MDL 3060 · N.D. Ill.

Chemical hair relaxer cancer lawsuits — MDL 3060, In re Hair Relaxer Marketing, Sales Practices, and Products Liability Litigation, N.D..

Overview

Chemical hair relaxer cancer lawsuits — MDL 3060, In re Hair Relaxer Marketing, Sales Practices, and Products Liability Litigation, N.D. Ill., Judge Mary M. Rowland (per JPML). Claimants are women who used chemical hair relaxers or straighteners for years and were later diagnosed with uterine (including endometrial) or ovarian cancer, or developed serious uterine fibroids (per complaints). The federal MDL had ~12,129 plaintiffs as of September 2026, with cases also pending in state courts including a Philadelphia mass-tort docket; the cases are moving through expert discovery and bellwether preparation with a January trial date reported, and no global settlement or payout program has been announced (per lawsuit-information-center and firm pages, Sep 2026). We track the public record — we do not promise or predict outcomes.

Status of the science / claims: Plaintiffs cite studies linking chemical hair relaxers/straighteners to uterine and ovarian cancer; the NIH Sister Study reported an association with uterine cancer (per the study). Causation is contested and no controlling determination has been made (per court posture).

Companies involved

Settlement amounts

No global settlement, payout program, or established average compensation amount as of September 2026 (per lawsuit-information-center). Bellwether preparation is underway; no amount can be promised.

Figures above are as reported by the cited sources — not a promise of any individual outcome.

Last updated: 2026-09-01

Full breakdown: settlement amounts page →

Case count

12,100 cases as of September 1, 2026
MonthFiled casesΔ
Sep 1, 202612,100+5100
Jun 1, 20247,000+5000
Jun 1, 20232,000—

Key dates

  1. September 1, 2026~12,129 plaintiffs in the federal MDL; expert discovery and bellwether preparation underway; no global settlement announced (per lawsuit-information-center, Sep 2026)
  2. June 25, 2026Discovery disputes escalate; L’Oréal appeals a Philadelphia deposition order (per Verus LLC/Law.com)
  3. June 1, 2023First coordinated discovery orders (per court records)
  4. February 6, 2023JPML transfers and consolidates cases into MDL 3060, N.D. Ill., Judge Mary M. Rowland (per JPML)

Updates

  • Updated Sep 1, 2026New case (Sep 2026): MDL 3060 (N.D. Ill., Judge Rowland) — ~12,129 plaintiffs; expert discovery and bellwether prep; no global settlement announced (per lawsuit-information-center).

Last updated: 28 days ago

Full changelog →

Notable filings

No notable filings recorded yet. Docket entries are added from public court records as they appear.

FAQ

Frequently asked questions about this case record, answered from the public record.

How many hair relaxer lawsuits are there?

The federal MDL 3060 includes ~12,129 plaintiffs as of September 2026, plus additional cases in state courts including the Philadelphia mass-tort docket (per lawsuit-information-center, Sep 2026).

Is there a hair relaxer settlement?

No global settlement, payout program, or established average compensation amount has been announced as of September 2026 (per lawsuit-information-center). Expert discovery and bellwether preparation are underway.

Who is being sued?

Manufacturers of chemical hair relaxers and straighteners, including L’Oréal (Dark & Lovely, SoftSheen-Carson) and others named in the MDL and state actions (per complaints and court filings). The Arizona attorney general has also sued L’Oréal over the products (per firm pages, 2026).

Think this matters to you?

This page is neutral reference material — not legal advice. If you were affected, the next step is a free case review with a licensed attorney working this matter.

Start free case review →

By continuing you agree to our privacy policy. Your contact details are shared only with law firms working this matter, on request.