United States of America

A growing number of families are filing Roblox child exploitation lawsuits after predators allegedly used the platform to groom, manipulate, or gain access to minors. Roblox spent years branding itself as a safe place for children to create and play. Plaintiffs contend that its safety systems did not match that promise.

Federal lawsuits filed around the country allege that Roblox failed to protect minors from foreseeable exploitation and grooming risks. Most of these individual cases are now coordinated in the Roblox MDL in the Northern District of California, Case No. 25-md-03166-RS, before Chief Judge Richard Seeborg.

The core allegations are straightforward. Families claim Roblox failed to enforce meaningful barriers between adults and children and profited from design choices that kept young users engaged while leaving them vulnerable. Many complaints describe the same pattern: a predator initiates contact through in-game chat or messaging, builds trust, and then moves the conversation to Discord, Snapchat, or another outside service where the exploitation escalates.

Bard PowerPort lawsuits allege that defects in implanted port catheters can cause fractures, migration, blood clots, infections, embolisms, and other serious complications. Thousands of product liability lawsuits are now pending against Bard and its parent company, Becton Dickinson, in a federal multidistrict litigation in Arizona.

The first bellwether trial ended with a partial defense verdict and a deadlocked jury on the central design defect claim. Additional trials are scheduled for 2026. Our lawyers remain bullish on well-documented fracture, migration, and embolization cases. Infection-only claims may face harder causation arguments and could receive lower settlement offers if Bard eventually proposes a global resolution.

This page provides the latest Bard PowerPort lawsuit updates, projected settlement amounts, and information about who may qualify to file a claim. No global settlement has been announced, and all payout estimates remain speculative.

A spinal cord stimulator is an implantable medical device used to manage chronic pain, most often involving the back or spine. These systems are marketed as a way to reduce pain by interrupting nerve signals before they reach the brain. But for a growing number of patients, the device fails to help. It introduces new and sometimes permanent problems, including electrical shocks, burning pain, infections, lead migration, hardware failure, and repeat surgeries to reposition or remove equipment that was supposed to improve quality of life.

This page explains spinal cord stimulator lawsuits and why they are being filed nationwide. It focuses on what patients are alleging, how these devices have failed in real-world use, and why many of these cases go beyond ordinary medical malpractice claims. The most serious lawsuits do not center on a single surgical mistake. They examine how modern spinal cord stimulators were designed, tested, and approved, and whether patients were ever adequately warned about the risks that now recur repeatedly in medical records and FDA reports.

Many people arrive here with a practical question in mind: what do spinal cord stimulator settlement amounts look like, and how does compensation get calculated when a device causes lasting harm? That question cannot be answered in isolation. Settlement amounts and payouts are driven by the full medical timeline, including the costs of repeat surgeries, explantation, and permanent loss of function, as well as the downstream consequences when a pain-management device leaves someone worse off than before it was implanted.

Hand, wrist, and finger injuries are often undervalued by insurance companies because the injured body part is small. That is a mistake. A serious hand injury can change how you work, drive, cook, write, type, lift, dress, bathe, hold tools, or care for your family.

This page explains settlement amounts for hand, wrist, and finger injuries caused by car accidents, falls, dog bites, unsafe property conditions, defective products, and other acts of negligence. We also examine reported verdicts and settlements to show what pushes these claims up or down in value.

A dominant-hand injury can carry greater value when it permanently limits writing, gripping, typing, lifting, tool use, or employment. But dominance is only one factor. The diagnosis, surgery, permanence, occupation, lost income, insurance coverage, and strength of the liability evidence usually have a greater effect on the final settlement.

This page provides updates on Camp Lejeune lawsuits. Our lawyers are still working to give the latest update on the litigation, even though we are no longer taking new cases. Why? Because there is little information out there, and we are staying with victims, including those we do not represent, until the end.

We have also recently reopened the comments below to answer any questions you may have or simply give you a chance to share your thoughts.

Latest Camp Lejeune Lawsuit Updates for 2026

Tylenol autism lawsuits are being filed nationwide with a new Tylenol Autism class action lawsuit – technically an MDL, as we explain below – now certified in federal court.

Another Path For Victims – Baby Food

There may be another path to compensation for some victims.  Plaintiffs’ Tylenol lawyers are exploring options in state court (and looking at potential baby food lawsuits for children with autism.. Those lawsuits are gaining new currency after the Tylenol cases faltered in the MDL.

This page explains the Suboxone tooth decay lawsuits, the dental injuries linked to Suboxone film, and where the federal MDL stands in 2026.

The core claim in the Suboxone litigation is straightforward: plaintiffs allege that Indivior and related defendants knew, or should have known, that Suboxone film could cause severe dental damage, including tooth decay, enamel erosion, broken teeth, tooth loss, and expensive dental reconstruction. Plaintiffs contend the companies failed to warn patients and prescribing doctors until the FDA forced a dental warning in 2022.

Our firm is not accepting new Suboxone cases in 2026. This page is provided for litigation updates and general information for victims and their families

This page is for victims considering filing a Depo-Provera lawsuit. Our lawyers provide the latest updates on these claims, explain the litigation process, and predict Depo Provera settlement amounts.

A new scientific study has provided stunning evidence that using Depo-Provera can cause brain tumors. Women who used Depo-Provera and subsequently developed a meningioma brain tumor can file a Depo-Provera lawsuit seeking financial compensation. This new evidence is leading to a wave of Depo-Provera lawsuits nationwide.

Our attorneys are taking these cases in all 50 states. If you think you have a Depo Provera lawsuit, call us today at 800-553-8082 or contact us online.

Uber is facing the largest wave of passenger sexual assault lawsuits in U.S. history. Survivors across the country allege that Uber drivers sexually assaulted them and that the company is legally responsible because it failed to screen drivers properly, ignored prior complaints, and did not implement basic safety measures.

These claims are now consolidated in In re: Uber Technologies Inc., Passenger Sexual Assault Litigation, MDL No. 3084, in the Northern District of California. The Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation centralized these lawsuits because they share common factual questions about Uber’s knowledge of sexual assault reports, driver screening, driver training, and safety measures. This is not technically a class action lawsuit. It is an MDL where the cases are consolidated for discovery, but each victim maintains her own claim.

As of June 2026, more than 3,000 plaintiffs have joined the federal MDL, with hundreds more cases still pending in the California coordinated proceeding. The first MDL trial began in January 2026, and the jury returned an $8.5 million verdict in early February. Our lawyers believe these are exceptionally strong cases. The evidence points to a pattern: repeated warnings about dangerous drivers, no action from Uber, and preventable assaults that followed.

This page is for women considering filing a vaginal mesh lawsuit in 2026.

Vaginal mesh litigation has become one of the most significant medical device mass torts in American history. The first wave involved tens of thousands of lawsuits against manufacturers of transvaginal mesh, pelvic mesh, and mid-urethral sling products. Many of those cases have settled. But the litigation is not over. Women are still filing new vaginal mesh lawsuits in 2026, especially when they have recent revision surgery, mesh erosion, chronic pelvic pain, painful intercourse, urinary problems, bowel or bladder complications, or clear medical records tying their injuries to the mesh implant.

This page explains where vaginal mesh lawsuits stand now, who may still qualify, how new standalone cases differ from the old federal MDL system, and what settlement amounts may look like for women with strong, well-documented claims.

Contact Information