Illinois Injury and Mass Tort Lawyer Blog

Published on: November 8, 2022

Product Liability Lawsuit Filed Against L’Oréal For Its Hair Relaxer

african-american-1180847_640 Recently, a woman filed a lawsuit against cosmetics manufacturer L’Oréal and several other companies. She alleges that hair straightening products put her at increased risk of uterine cancer and asked for monetary damages and the cost of medical monitoring. In the research studies that support the case, the link between hair relaxers and uterine cancer was strongest among black women. It is believed that the recently filed lawsuit is one of many potential suits to come that involve companies that misled women about the safety of hair relaxers to increase profits. If you developed uterine cancer because of a hair relaxer, you should give the seasoned Chicago-based lawyers of Moll Law Group.

Call Moll Law Group About Your Uterine Cancer Case

The plaintiff in the case that was recently filed was 32-year old Jenny Mitchell who is a woman of color that started getting hair relaxers around third grade when she was age 8. The complaint alleges her uterine cancer was both directly and legally caused by long-term and regular exposure to chemicals that disrupt the endocrine system, including phthalates. She used chemical straightening products between 2000-2022 and is asking for compensation of more than $75,000. She was diagnosed with uterine cancer in 2018 and had to undergo a full hysterectomy, as a result of which she cannot bear a child. She does not have a known family history of uterine cancer.

In connection with her lawsuit, she said that most young African American girls are introduced to chemical hair straighteners as young girls. She alleged that society has made straight hair the norm; many people feel pressured to straighten their hair and use hair relaxers. Black and Latina women who don’t straighten their hair may experience workplace discrimination, and that further incentivizes the use of dangerous relaxers.

Continue reading →

Published on: November 1, 2022

Johnson & Johnson’s Attack on Consumer Protection

By Moll Law Group

towels-5961628_1280-e1665172973117 Around 20,000 women get an ovarian cancer diagnosis each year. For more than half, the illness is fatal. Johnson & Johnson has spent billions on lawsuits related to talc. A recent piece in the New Yorker outlined the new legal strategy the company’s executives have used to halt the substantial litigation—if the strategy is successful, other companies may use it, too, and this could harm future claims brought by injured consumers. If you suffered ovarian cancer and believe it may have been caused by Johnson & Johnson’s baby powder (or talcum powder made by a different manufacturer), you should call the Chicago-based product liability lawyers of Moll Law Group. Our firm represents injured consumers and billions have been recovered in the cases with which we’ve been involved.

Call Moll Law Group About Your J&J Talc Claim

Risk factors for ovarian cancer include a family history of reproductive cancer, use of fertility drugs, being overweight, unhealthy diet, and prior cancer diagnosis. Another risk factor is use of talcum powder. Research underlying the claims of a study in the Journal of the American Medical Association didn’t find a statistically significant connection between talc and ovarian cancer; however it also didn’t necessarily distinguish between talc-containing powders and baby powders that didn’t contain talc. Other studies have found a significant connection between women who used talc for feminine hygiene and cancer.

Once aware of a potential risk, many manufacturers stopped using talc—cornstarch in baby powder is cheap and safer. But Johnson & Johnson continued to use talc in spite of the complex issues around its use, and in spite of being a brand with influence and trusting consumers. The company’s slogan was, for a time: “A sprinkle a day helps keep odor away.”

Continue reading →

Published on: October 25, 2022

Juul Settlement for Teen Vaping Investigation

By Moll Law Group

vape-3417374_640 Initially, Juul Labs sold pods for its e-cigarettes in a wide range of flavors and promoted them using strategies that would appeal to young people. Teens began vaping at school, between classes and during breaks. However, in recent years, the company has come under scrutiny; the public has learned that teens are getting addicted while vaping, and harmed. Recently, Juul announced that it will pay close to $440 million to settle a two-year investigation conducted by 33 states into the marketing of its vaping products, which may have increased teen vaping across the country. If your teen was harmed by vaping in the course of using Juul Labs’ or other electronic cigarettes, you should call the experienced Chicago-based product liability lawyers of Moll Law Group.

Call Moll Law Group About Teen Vaping

Juul reached a deal between itself and certain states and Puerto Rico, which banded together in 2020, to investigate the company’s early promotion of e-cigarettes, which involved the claim that it was providing a smoking alternative. However, investigators found that part of the company’s marketing efforts were to underage teenagers. They presented launch parties, product giveaways, ads, and social media posts that utilized young looking models.

As part of the settlement, Juul will not only need to pay $38.5 million over 6 – 10 years but will also need to accept the mandates of injunctive terms. Some of the settlement money received by states will go towards preventing teen vaping. Post-settlement, Juul will still face 9 other distinct lawsuits in other states. It simultaneously faces hundreds of lawsuits filed on behalf of teenagers and others who became addicted to its products.

Continue reading →

Published on: October 18, 2022

Eliminating Statute of Limitations for Childhood Sexual Abuse

By Moll Law Group

boy-1666611_6401 President Biden recently signed the Eliminating Limits to Justice for Child Sex Abuse Victims Act. This bill eliminates the statute of limitations for civil claims filed by those who were sexually abused as minors. The Senate passed the law by unanimous vote earlier this year, and it passed by the House by voice vote recently. It covers federal lawsuits involving minors who went through human trafficking, child pornography, sexual abuse, or forced labor. Although a significant percentage of childhood sexual abuse goes unreported, the signing of the bill is a huge step forward for survivors hoping for justice. If you were harmed by childhood sexual abuse, you should call the seasoned personal injury lawyers of Moll Law Group.

Call Moll Law Group About Your Childhood Sexual Abuse Claim

Historically, minors who survived childhood sexual abuse could file federal civil claims until they arrived at age 28 or, alternatively, for ten years after they discovered a violation or injury. Criminal claims arising out of childhood sexual abuse were not subject to a federal statute of limitations. The recently signed bill eliminates time constraints for survivors to file civil claims related to a range of sex abuse crimes against minors, including forced labor, sex trafficking, sexual abuse, aggravated sexual abuse, and sexual exploitation of children.

Senators Dick Durbin of Illinois and Marsha Blackburn introduced the bipartisan bill. Senators Dianne Feinstein, John Cornyn, and Patrick Leahy co-sponsored it. Senator Durbin commented on how long it typically takes for victims to come forward after suffering these kinds of trauma in his statement once the House had passed the bill. Organizations that endorsed the law include RAINN, National Alliance to End Sexual Violence (NAESV), CHILD USA, and the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children.

Continue reading →

Published on: October 11, 2022

Lawyers for Injuries Arising Out of Exactech Implant Systems

By Moll Law Group

operation-1807543_6401-300x217 Exactech is a leading maker of implant systems, medical devices, used in joint replacement surgeries. The company had recalled all its knee, hip & ankle replacement implants made after 2004 when it was found that a packaging defect resulted in degradation of a polyethylene insert prior to use. When an insert prematurely fails, a patient may experience severe pain; the failure may necessitate a revision surgery to replace it. Recently, in the course of a hearing, the cases were consolidated in multidistrict litigation. If you were harmed by an Exactech implant system, you should discuss your claim with the knowledgeable product liability lawyers of Moll Law Group.

Call Moll Law Group About Exactech Implant Injuries

An orthopedic surgeon, along with a biomedical engineer and organizational culture advocate, founded Exactech to develop and make joint implants, which are used by surgeons to relieve pain and also allow for mobility. Exactech’s product line includes software and instruments, along with biologics meant to accelerate wound healing. The company’s primary products are hip, shoulder, ankle, and knee replacement devices with varying names. Novation, Alteon, and BIOLOXdelta are Exactech hip replacement models.

Studies have revealed that the company’s hip implants have a 5-year survival rate, which means there is a lower chance that an implant would need to be replaced in 5 years. Over a period of years, Exactech has faced lawsuits based on allegations that it knowingly sold defective products to government entities and participated in unlawful consulting agreements with doctors. The company faces numerous legal claims based on the circumstances of its recall of ankle and knee implants last year and this year. The Novation Element Step had at least a 92.4% survival rate at 5 years. The authors of the study stressed that further long-term studies were needed to evaluate performance over time.

Continue reading →

Published on: September 20, 2022

Manufacturer Class 1 Recall of the Hamilton-C6 Intensive Care Ventilator

By Moll Law Group

healing-g05658ec7b_640-e1662149522499 Recently, Hamilton Medical AG recalled its Hamilton-C6 Intensive Care Ventilator after discovering potential water ingress, the result of a potential defect, could halt breathing support. The water ingress was found in the course of investigating a customer complaint that demonstrated loose hardware in the status indicator board for the ventilator. As a result, water can seep between the main board and the indicator board. This is a class I recall, which means it’s serious and that using the ventilator could result in a patient’s severe injury or death. For that reason, it’s imperative that patients and their doctors not use the ventilator in question. If you or a loved one were injured by the Hamilton-C6 Intensive Care Ventilator, you should call the seasoned product liability attorneys of Moll Law Group. Billions have been recovered in claims and lawsuits with which we’ve been involved.

Discuss Your Potential Claim with Moll Law Group

Doctors use the ventilator in question to give infants, children, and adults breathing support through a tube inserted into the airway, nose or mouth, or a face mask. However, water ingress could cause the ventilator to revert to its safety mode or ambient state, or provide flawed services, which means the machine would not provide the help patients need. Another, alternate source of ventilation would need to be given —the patient could suffer hypoxia, a brain injury caused by lack of oxygen. Another possible injury the patient could suffer is carbon dioxide build-up. The worst outcomes are death.

While there have been 128 complaints around the world about this issue with the ventilator, there have been no reported injuries or deaths so far. The manufacturer issued a Field Safety Notice with specific guidance on June 27, 2022. The Notice recommended that doctors and hospitals check the ventilators in question if they’re in use and let the distributor know right away if the status indicator board had come loose, in which case, the front housing of the ventilator has to be replaced. The replacement should occur immediately so that a patient doesn’t suffer injury, and doctors have been instructed to give a patient alternative ventilation.

Continue reading →

Published on: September 13, 2022

Recall of More Than 2 Million MamaRoo and RockaRoo Infant Swings and Rockers

By Moll Law Group

baby-g0c0b11dd5_640-e1662148257700 On August 15, 2022, the manufacturer 4moms recalled MamaRoo Baby Swing, versions 1.0 through 4.0 and RockaRoo Baby Rockers. They announced that there is a hazard associated with the swings and rockers; when restraint straps hang below the seat and are not being used to secure an infant in the seat, a crawling infant can get tangled up and even strangled by the dangling straps. The recall affected 220,000 RockaRoo rockers, and 2 million MamaRoo swings. If your child was injured or died because of entanglement in a rocker or swing strap, you should give the seasoned product liability lawyers of Moll Law Group a call.

Call Moll Law Group About a MamaRoo Baby Swing or RockaRoo Baby Rocker Claim

The MamaRoo baby swing and the RockaRoo baby rocker are intended to calm or occupy babies. The former provides several different motions, speeds and sounds. Only those MamaRoo models that have a 3 point harness, not a 5 point harness, were recalled. These are versions 1.0, 2.0, 3.0 and 4.0. The rocker glides front to back and has control knobs to control the range of motion. The recalled model is 4M-012, which is printed on the bottom of the rocker.

Thorley Industries, LLC, d.b.a. 4 moms announced the recall of these rockers and swings due to entanglement hazards. The company has received two reports of infant entanglement in hanging straps. A ten-month old infant was asphyxiated and died. Another suffered bruising on his neck but was, fortunately, saved by his caregiver. While there have been no reports regarding the RockaRoo baby rockers, they also have hanging straps and therefore may pose a risk.

Continue reading →

Published on: September 6, 2022

Unexpected Decision in 3M Litigation

By Moll Law Group

soldier-gba1564472_640 U.S. bankruptcy Judge Jeffrey Graham recently ruled that military veterans who allege they suffered hearing loss because of 3M earplugs can continue to pursue litigation against the company, even though their subsidiaries filed for bankruptcy on July 26^th. This ruling disrupts earplug manufacturer 3M’s efforts to evade payment of claims arising out of earplugs plaintiffs believe caused their hearing loss. Company shares plummeted 12% after this ruling. If you suffered hearing loss due to 3M earplugs, you should give our experienced product liability lawyers a call. At Moll Law Group, billions have been recovered in cases with which we’ve been involved.

Call Moll Law Group About Your 3M Earplug Claim

Court-watchers were not expecting the bankruptcy judge’s decision. Often courts do agree to stay (stop) litigation against subsidiaries’ solvent parent companies when they are being sued by many litigants and want to use the bankruptcy process to get a global settlement that might not represent the true value of the plaintiffs’ losses. The bankruptcy judge’s decision, couched within bankruptcy law, doesn’t stop 3M or its subsidiaries from trying to globally settle the litigation, but the company doesn’t have as much leverage to force plaintiffs to settle if there is no stay. Meanwhile the MDL judge left this decision in the bankruptcy court’s hands.

So far, 3M has lost 10 out of 16 bellwether trials in the earplugs litigation. It still asserts that its earplugs weren’t defective, and that bankruptcy would be an appropriate means of resolving liability. It has filed a notice of appeal of the ruling and may try to appeal directly to the Seventh Circuit, United States Circuit Court of Appeals.

Continue reading →

Published on: September 2, 2022

Jury Awards More than $4.8 Million at Conclusion of Hernia Mesh Trial

By Moll Law Group

surgery-ga9893dfa2_640 In a recent decision, a jury has awarded over $4.8 million in the Ventralex hernia mesh path trial Trevino v. Davol Inc., Providence County Superior Court, Rhode Island, No. PC-2018-8437. The trial is believed to be the first hernia mesh case to go to trial in state court, and it was filed against manufacturers Davol Inc. and C.R. Bard. The jury came to its decision on August 29^th, and with interest, the award may go up to $7.68 million. If you were injured by Ventralex hernia mesh or another brand of hernia mesh, you should consult the experienced product liability lawyers of Moll Law Group about whether you have a claim for damages arising out of defects in the mesh.

Call Moll Law Group About Your Hernia Mesh Lawsuit

Many plaintiffs have alleged that Ventralex hernia repair mesh, manufactured out of plastic polypropylene, has defects. After a month-long trial against its manufacturers, the jury delivered a verdict against them. The court ordered C.R. Bard Inc., a subsidiary of Becton, Dickinson and Co., to pay $4.8 million to the plaintiff, a man who experienced severe complications after the mesh was implanted. He said that the Ventralex hernia mesh embedded itself into his tissue, and that as a result of severe pain and inflammation, he needed to undergo corrective surgery.

Around 17,000 hernia mesh cases have been consolidated in a multidistrict litigation in federal court, while others are consolidated in state court in Rhode Island. In connection with hernia mesh, the company faces over 30,000 suits similar to the one that went to trial. Nevertheless is has announced it plans to appeal.

Continue reading →

Published on: August 22, 2022

Epoch Everlasting Play’s Fabric Playhouse Does Not Meet Flammability Standards

By Moll Law Group

girls-g49ab55249_640 Recently, Epoch Everlasting Play announced that certain fabric playhouses and play tents don’t meet the industry flammability standard for children’s tents. Due to this failure, children across the country who use these tents are at risk of burn injuries. Approximately 251,600 fabric playhouses and tents in the United States were recalled voluntarily on July 28, 2022. The recall occurred under CPSC’s Fast Track Recall process. With this process, a company dedicates itself to working with the agency to not only announce a product recall but also develop a remedy. If your child was burned while using an Epoch Everlasting Play fabric house or tent, you should call the experienced Chicago-based product liability lawyers of Moll Law Group. Billions have been recovered in cases with which we’ve been involved.

Consult Moll Law Group About Your Play Tent Claim

The recalled playhouses and tents were made of mesh and nylon. Nylon storage bags are sold with them. Each tent and playhouse is about 36 inches by 54 inches. A label is sewn into the underside of the playhouse or tent; it says, “Epoch Everlasting Play.” These $30-$35 recalled products were sold at a range of toy stores and online, including at www.amazon.com, www.fatbraintoys, www.zulily.com, Target, Marshall’s and Toys R Us for several years, from March 2014 through March 2022.

The recall was conducted voluntarily by Epoch Everlasting Play under CPSC’s Fast Track Recall process. Fast Track recalls are initiated by firms, who commit to work with CPSC to quickly announce the recall and remedy to protect consumers. The play tents Epoch recalled include these models:

Pop Up Theater Tent,
Kidoozie Ice Castle Tent,
King Size Medieval Castle,
My Clubhouse,
Pirate Den Playhouse,
Royal Castle Playhouse.
Pop Up Theater Tent (Red),
Princess Hideaway Playhouse

Continue reading →