Articles Posted in Mass Torts

Women are still filing vaginal mesh lawsuits and bladder sling lawsuits in 2026, but this is no longer the enormous federal mass tort it was a decade ago. The old federal MDLs have closed. Most legacy claims have been resolved, and the remaining litigation is concentrated in individual cases and state-court dockets, including active Johnson & Johnson and Ethicon pelvic mesh cases in New Jersey.

A viable case now depends less on the history of the prior litigation and more on specific evidence: the manufacturer and product, the date of implantation, mesh erosion or another documented complication, revision surgery, and medical evidence linking the implant to the injury. Our lawyers are currently focused on selected claims involving products from Johnson & Johnson/Ethicon and Coloplast. We are not accepting new Boston Scientific mesh claims.

Substantively updated: September 14, 2026

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 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.

If you have Parkinson’s disease after years of working with pesticides, you may have wondered whether that exposure played a role. A December 2025 study gives lawyers and scientists a serious reason to investigate chlorpyrifos. Researchers associated estimated long-term residential exposure near agricultural applications with more than 2.5 times the risk of Parkinson’s disease. They also found Parkinson’s-related brain damage in mice that inhaled chlorpyrifos.

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.

Glucose monitor lawsuits are being filed by people who say continuous glucose monitoring systems failed when they needed them most. These lawsuits involve Dexcom G6, Dexcom G7, Abbott FreeStyle Libre 3, and Abbott FreeStyle Libre 3 Plus sensors, apps, and receivers that allegedly provided inaccurate glucose readings, missed high- or low-glucose alerts, failed early, or failed to warn users that glucose data had stopped reporting.

This is no small complaint for someone with diabetes who relies on these monitors. A continuous glucose monitor can drive decisions about insulin, food, sleep, exercise, and emergency care. When a sensor falsely reports low glucose, a patient may eat carbohydrates or delay insulin. When a device misses a low alert, a patient may seize, lose consciousness, fall, or die. When a high glucose event is missed, the result can be prolonged hyperglycemia, diabetic ketoacidosis, hospitalization, or worse.  Of course, a malfunctioning glucose monitor typically causes more minor injuries and inconveniences.

Our lawyers are looking for serious glucose monitor cases involving serious injury or death.

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.

Our AFFF firefighting foam lawyers believe the defendants will settle most of these lawsuits this year (2026) before a single trial.  Why? They will follow the same pattern as the water contamination lawsuits they settled for billions of dollars.  In those cases, we saw the defendants’ apparent preference for settlement over the uncertainties of a trial.  This makes sense; the AFFF lawsuits are strong cases.

Gabapentin lawsuits are now being investigated because new research has raised concerns that long-term or repeated gabapentin use is linked to dementia, mild cognitive impairment, memory loss, confusion, and other cognitive problems.

These cases are still developing, and we are in the early rounds of this. There is no nationwide gabapentin dementia MDL, no approved class action settlement, and no guaranteed payout. But the science is advancing, and the legal theories are strengthening as the evidence grows.

Gabapentin is one of the most commonly prescribed medications in the United States. It is sold under the brand name Neurontin and is also available as a generic. Doctors prescribe Neurontin for seizures, shingles-related nerve pain, and a long list of off-label conditions, including back pain, neuropathy, anxiety, migraines, fibromyalgia, sleep problems, and other chronic pain complaints.

For sickle cell patients and families, Oxbryta was supposed to be a lifeline. Instead, it left many worse off–facing new health crises, hospitalizations, and in some cases, unthinkable loss. Now, Oxbryta lawsuits are uncovering what Pfizer knew and when it knew it.

Oxbryta is a prescription drug developed by Global Blood Therapeutics and later acquired by Pfizer. It was voluntarily recalled in September 2024 after new evidence revealed that it caused serious and potentially fatal complications, including vaso-occlusive crises and organ damage.

This page looks at Oxbryta lawsuits and their potential settlement value.

Oxbryta is a prescription drug made by Pfizer that was recalled in September 2024 after evidence revealed that it caused a number of very serious and potentially fatal health problems, including vaso-occlusive crisis and organ damage. Continue reading

Breast mesh lawsuits allege that some manufacturers promoted or allowed their mesh products to become widely used in breast reconstruction, augmentation, and revision procedures despite the fact that FDA has not cleared or approved any surgical mesh product for use in breast surgery. The FDA has specifically stated that the safety and effectiveness of surgical mesh in breast surgery, including augmentation and reconstruction, has not been determined.

These internal bra lawsuits allege that manufacturers of products such as AlloDerm, GalaFLEX, Phasix, AlloMax, FlexHD, Strattice, and DuroSorb marketed their devices for breast reconstruction, augmentation, and revision surgeries even though those breast-specific applications had not been adequately studied or cleared by the FDA. Patients were not warned. Surgeons were not given enough information. So when complications developed, including infection, mesh failure, chronic pain, implant loss, breast deformity, and the need for additional surgery, many women had no reason to connect their injuries to the mesh product placed inside them.

This page explains the internal bra mesh lawsuit. Our lawyers talk about what the legal claims are, who may be eligible, what complications may qualify, how to identify your mesh product, what evidence matters, and what these cases may be worth.

Artificial intelligence has changed how people create, edit, and distribute images. But it has also opened a dangerous new frontier for exploitation and abuse. One of the most alarming developments is the rise of AI-generated sexual deepfakes: fake images or videos that can make it appear as though a real person was nude, sexualized, or involved in conduct that never happened.

The Grok deepfake lawsuit is one of the clearest early tests of whether AI companies can be held legally responsible when their tools generate or enable nonconsensual sexual images. These claims are not just about bad users. They are about product design, warnings, safeguards, profit, notice, and whether a company can release a powerful image-generation tool into the world and then blame victims when the predictable abuse occurs.

If your image, your child’s image, or someone you love was used in an AI-generated sexual deepfake, treat it like evidence in a serious civil case. Because it is. Screenshots help, but URLs, account names, timestamps, takedown requests, medical records, school records, employment records, and platform responses can all help. You do not need every piece of evidence to call, but the more we can preserve, the stronger the case may be.

Contact Information