Our lawyers are handling baby powder lawsuits in all 50 states in 2026. The talcum powder lawsuits against Johnson & Johnson have been ongoing for years. The lawsuits allege that prolonged use of talcum powder (or “talc”), the active ingredient in products such as Baby Powder and Shower to Shower, can cause ovarian cancer in some women.
This page provides an update on J&J talc powder litigation and discusses the settlement amounts in ovarian cancer lawsuits for victims.
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. After a long slog, these cases are now moving forward.
The first bellwether trial ended with a partial defense verdict and a deadlocked jury on the central design defect claim. The second trial, Divelbliss v. C.R. Bard, led to a $40 million verdict. It involved an alleged fracture of a silicone Groshong catheter. The third trial, Lattanzio, ended in a defense verdict on October 30, 2026, in a catheter infection case. Five bellwether trials are scheduled through February 2027. The early results have been very different, and our lawyers remain bullish on well-documented fracture, migration, and embolization cases.
This page provides the latest Bard PowerPort lawsuit updates, projected settlement amounts, and information about who may qualify to file a claim.
Our lawyers are handling AFFF firefighting foam lawsuits around the country.
This page provides the most recent news and updates on the AFFF firefighting foam class action lawsuit and our prediction of the settlement amounts that plaintiffs with AFFF cancer lawsuits can expect to receive. You will not get more updated news on the AFFF litigation anywhere else.
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 victims want to know what spinal cord stimulator settlement amounts will look like and how we think compensation will be calculated, assuming an ultimate settlement. Settlement amounts and payouts in these cases will depend on several factors, which we dig into more fully below.
In this post, our Roundup lawyers will give you:
The Apple AirTag litigation now includes a federal MDL for people who allege that Apple AirTags were used to stalk, track, threaten, or harm them. On October 2, 2026, the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation consolidated the federal AirTag stalking lawsuits into MDL No. 3199 in the Northern District of California, transferring 17 lawsuits from 13 federal districts to one judge.
There is no AirTag settlement for all victims. Not yet. But Apple says it has already settled a number of individual AirTag stalking claims. The Apple AirTag MDL gives us a chance to screen these cases and put them on an organized path forward. It is rare to be talking settlement this early in an MDL. But Apple has already shown that it is willing to resolve at least some of these claims.
What are these cases about? The core allegation is simple. Apple created a small, inexpensive, remarkably effective tracking device that could be hidden in a car, purse, backpack, or other personal property. For most uses, it is a fantastic device. The problem is Apple knew before AirTag was released that the device could be abused for stalking. Of course, Apple did not want this and built anti-stalking protections. The claim in these lawsuits is that those protections were not nearly enough to protect some victims.
Our lawyers are now focusing our attention on the Medtronic Bravo CF capsule recall.
This device is used to diagnose acid reflux and gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). In September 2026, the FDA classified a major recall of these devices as Class I, the agency’s most serious recall category.
This should be a simple no-frills test. A doctor attaches a small capsule to the lining of the patient’s esophagus. The capsule measures acidity and transmits readings to a receiver the patient wears. The goal is to determine whether the patient has acid reflux.
Chlorpyrifos lawsuits allege that repeated exposure to this widely used insecticide can contribute to Parkinson’s disease. The people most likely to bring these claims are farmers, pesticide applicators, pest control workers, groundskeepers, greenhouse employees, and others who personally mixed, loaded, sprayed, or cleaned up chlorpyrifos products over months or years.
Chlorpyrifos (CPF) was sold under trade names that include Dursban, Lorsban, Cobalt, Nufos, Bolton, Stallion, Pilot, Warhawk, and Hatchet. It was used on farms, golf courses, ornamental plants, and residential and commercial properties. Many workers remember the trade name but not the active ingredient. Product identification is therefore one of the first and most important parts of investigating a claim.
Quick answers
Our lawyers are primarily investigating gambling addiction lawsuits involving DraftKings and FanDuel.
These lawsuits revolve around the idea that these companies had the data to identify compulsive gambling behavior. Did they use that data to protect gambling addicts or did they use this information to target them?
No, just the opposite. Instead of slowing vulnerable users down, DraftKings, FanDuel, and other defendants allegedly saw them as cash cow targets and pushed bonus bets, deposit matches, and anything else they could to keep them addicted and burning money on their betting apps. So the issue at trial is whether the platform used design, data, and marketing to keep a vulnerable user betting when a responsible operator should have stepped in.
Video game addiction lawsuits seek to hold gaming companies accountable for exploiting vulnerable players, particularly minors and young adults, through intentionally addictive game designs.
Gaming addiction has caused significant harm, including mental health struggles, social isolation, sleep disruption, academic decline, financial strain, and family conflict. The lawsuits allege that gaming companies prioritized profit over user safety by designing games to keep children and young adults playing longer, spending more money, and returning even when the games were harming them.
Our attorneys examine claims involving Fortnite, Roblox, Minecraft, Call of Duty, Grand Theft Auto, Apex Legends, Madden, FIFA, and other online games. Below, we look at who may qualify, the video game addiction settlement value our lawyers project for successful claims, and the latest developments in court.
Lawsuit Information Center