Defendants' motion to dismiss hair relaxer chemical class action lawsuits is inconsistent with the law, plaintiffs' attorneys argue.
Lawyers are scheduled to meet with the judge presiding over the hair relaxer lawsuits this week, as plaintiffs accuse manufacturers of engaging in an effort to unnecessarily delay the litigation and start of bellwether trials.
Motion to dismiss argues that the hair relaxer class action lawsuit does not involve plaintiffs who suffered an actual injury, and that the claims are preempted by federal law.
With more than 8,000 hair relaxer lawsuits moving forward in the federal court sytem, the parties continue to disagree on a number of issues, including which cases should be considered for early trial dates.
Industry lobbyists claim the study's findings may "unnecessarily scare" consumers, despite a lack of information on the potential health risks bottled water nanoplastics.
As parties finalize hair relaxer lawsuit bellwether protocol plans, which will be submitted by January 8, each individual plaintiff has been ordered to complete a fact sheet providing additional details about their injuries and products used
Early test trials will help gauge how juries may respond to evidence that will be repeated in thousands of hair relaxer lawsuits being pursued by women diagnosed with uterine cancer, ovarian cancer and other injuries.
Judge Rowland said defendants were either premature in seeking dismissal, or that plaintiffs had sufficiently pled their hair relaxer lawsuit claims.
Researchers warned that pregnant women could be exposed to multiple hormone disrupting chemicals every day, and provided recommendations on how to reduce prenatal exposure.
Thousands of new hair relaxer lawsuits have been filed over the past few months, claiming manufacturers knew their products put women at risk of cancer.
