United States of America

Victims of sexual abuse or sexual assault are bringing civil lawsuits in California and getting significant settlements. Thanks to new changes in California law, it is now much easier for sex abuse victims to access the civil courts.

In this post, we will examine the process and laws related to sex abuse lawsuits in California. We will also examine the average settlement amounts of these cases and provide examples of settlements and jury payouts.

If you have a sex abuse case in California, contact us today online or call 800-553-8082.

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

Dry shampoo lawsuits alleged that aerosol products sold under the Batiste, Sun Bum, and Paul Mitchell names contained benzene that consumers never expected to find in a hair product. The lawsuits followed laboratory testing that detected benzene in specific batches of dry shampoo from dozens of brands.

The largest public resolution was a settlement involving Batiste manufacturer Church & Dwight. That settlement is finished. It provided a $2.5 million cash fund and up to $600,000 in product vouchers, which explains why you may see it described as either a $2.5 million or $3.1 million deal. Those are two ways of describing different parts of the same settlement.

If you bought Batiste dry shampoo but did not file a claim by the 2023 deadline, you are too late to collect from that settlement. The individual payments were picayune anyway. People without proof of purchase could receive up to $10, while consumers with receipts could seek reimbursement subject to the settlement terms.

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 old litigation and more on specific proof: the manufacturer and product, the date of implantation, mesh erosion or another documented complication, revision surgery, and medical evidence connecting the implant to the injury. Our lawyers are currently focused on selected claims involving Johnson & Johnson/Ethicon and Coloplast products. We are not accepting new Boston Scientific mesh claims.

This page provides our latest transvaginal mesh lawsuit update, explains bladder sling complications lawsuits, discusses settlement value, and answers whether it may still be possible to file. Call 800-553-8082 or contact us online for a free case review.

Our lawyers are actively reviewing hair relaxer cancer lawsuits across all 50 states. These claims involve women who used chemical hair relaxers or hair straighteners and later developed uterine cancer, endometrial cancer, ovarian cancer, uterine fibroids, or complications that led to a hysterectomy.

This page explains the latest developments in the federal hair relaxer MDL, how the litigation is unfolding, which injuries are being reviewed, and how our lawyers are considering potential settlement amounts. The strongest claims generally involve long-term use of chemical hair relaxers followed by a diagnosis of uterine cancer, endometrial cancer, ovarian cancer, or severe fibroid-related injuries.

Our hair relaxer lawsuit lawyers are actively representing victims nationwide. Call our attorneys today at 800-553-8082 or get a free online consultation.

Dupixent lawsuits are now moving forward in federal court for patients who allege the drug caused, accelerated, or unmasked cutaneous T-cell lymphoma and related T-cell lymphomas. On June 4, 2026, the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation centralized the federal Dupixent cases in MDL No. 3180, In re: Dupixent (Dupilumab) Products Liability Litigation, in the District of New Jersey before Judge Zahid N. Quraishi.

Dupixent, also known as dupilumab, is a biologic medication used to treat atopic dermatitis, asthma, chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps, eosinophilic esophagitis, prurigo nodularis, COPD, bullous pemphigoid, allergic fungal rhinosinusitis, and other inflammatory conditions. For many patients, Dupixent has provided real relief where other treatments failed. But for some patients, the story has been very different.

The lawsuits allege that Regeneron and Sanofi failed to warn doctors and patients that cutaneous T-cell lymphoma, often called CTCL, can mimic eczema and that Dupixent may mask, accelerate, or delay diagnosis of an underlying lymphoma. Plaintiffs argue that patients with adult-onset, atypical, or treatment-resistant dermatitis should have been warned to rule out lymphoma before starting Dupixent and to stop and investigate if symptoms worsened or changed during treatment.

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.

Has the deadline passed for you to file a talcum powder lawsuit? Many who assume the statute of limitations has passed to sue Johnson & Johnson may be wrong. But as we write this in January 2026, his settlement has blown up, and we are back at it. We are still signing up new clients, but this may not last much longer. Call us today at 800-553-8082 or get a free and quick case review online.

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.

Contact Information