Hair Relaxer Lawsuit Updates

By David Meldofsky, California-licensed attorney · Founder, Lawsuit Informer

Last updated: October 4, 2026

Arizona sued L'Oréal on September 10, 2026. The state says the company sold relaxers such as Dark & Lovely, Optimum and Mizani for decades. It says buyers were never told about research linking those products to uterine and ovarian cancer. Separately, 12,381 cases brought by women and their families are waiting in federal court. The judge there has not yet ruled on what scientific evidence either side can use.

No settlement has been announced and nobody has been paid. This page follows those developments as the court record changes.

Hair Relaxer MDL 3060 Case Count and Current Status

The federal hair relaxer cases are grouped together before one judge in Illinois, Judge Mary M. Rowland, in what the courts call MDL 3060. As of October 1, 2026 there were 12,381 still pending, up from 12,129 in September and 11,779 in August. That makes it the fourth-largest group of federal cases of its kind. Counts move month to month as new cases are filed and others are closed or combined.

The companies being sued are the makers and sellers of the relaxer brands. The order that created the MDL in February 2023 named nine company groups. The defense side has grown well past that since. More than twenty companies appear on current court filings, including:

• L’Oréal USA and L’Oréal USA Products
• SoftSheen-Carson
• Revlon Consumer Products, Revlon Group Holdings and Revlon Inc.
• Strength of Nature and Strength of Nature Global
• Namasté Laboratories
• Godrej SON Holdings
• House of Cheatham and Beauty Bell Enterprises
• AFAM Concept, Avlon Industries, Luster Products and McBride Research Laboratories
• Dudley Beauty, Murray’s Worldwide, RNA Corporation and John Paul Mitchell Systems
• Sally Beauty Supply, a retailer rather than a maker

Revlon is in bankruptcy. The court has kept the cases against it moving under orders from the bankruptcy court.

These cases are no longer new. Both sides have spent 2026 gathering evidence and preparing the first cases for trial. In January 2026 the court held a "Science Day," a session where each side walked the judge through the research. Most of the year since has gone to the fight over which scientists each side may put in front of a jury.

The claims themselves come down to a few questions. Were the products designed safely. Did the labels warn about what the chemicals could do. Does frequent use over years raise the risk of cancer. And did the companies tell buyers what the research showed.

The research at the center of it is a 2022 analysis from the National Institutes of Health Sister Study. Of women who never used straighteners, an estimated 1.64% would develop uterine cancer by age 70. Among frequent users the estimate was 4.05%, roughly two and a half times as often. Those are the numbers both sides are fighting over. For the science the court is weighing, see The Hair Relaxer Cancer Studies, Explained, and for the underlying causation question see Does Hair Relaxer Cause Cancer?

What has happened recently

• September 2026, Arizona sued L'Oréal. The state's attorney general says L'Oréal and SoftSheen-Carson sold relaxers such as Dark & Lovely, Optimum and Mizani without warning buyers about cancer research. The state wants cancer warnings on the products, fines, and money for Arizona consumers. L'Oréal says the case has no merit. More on the Arizona case.
• October 2026, a trial date is on the calendar. The court set the first test trial for September 7, 2027 and built its 2027 hearing schedule around it. In late August the judge also reset the run-up: the ten test cases get cut to five, expert evidence-gathering closes in December 2026, and the big motions are due in January 2027.
• October 2026, the case count is 12,381. The federal panel that tracks these cases reported 12,381 still pending on October 1, up from 12,129 in September and 11,779 in August. New filings have outpaced the cases being closed for three months running.
• August 2026, a pause for one group of companies ended. On July 24 the judge refused to extend a pause that had protected a group of defendants since December 2025. They had asked for more time while private settlement talks continued. The plaintiffs objected, and the court said it was time to get on with the case. Those companies now have to hand over documents and take part in the ordinary process. No settlement has been announced and nobody has been paid.
• July 2026, the science arguments are with the judge. Both sides finished arguing over which expert evidence should be allowed on whether hair relaxers cause cancer. The ruling is still awaited, and it is the single most important thing pending.

Arizona's lawsuit against L'Oréal

On September 10, 2026, Arizona's attorney general, Kris Mayes, sued L'Oréal and its hair care company SoftSheen-Carson in state court in Phoenix. The state says the companies sold chemical relaxers to Black women and girls in Arizona for decades while calling them safe and gentle. It says they never told buyers about research linking frequent relaxer use to uterine and ovarian cancer.

The products named include Dark & Lovely, Optimum and Mizani. The state's complaint also lists Bantu, Care Free Curl, Look of Radiance, Roots of Nature and Ultra Precise. It points to Dark & Lovely Beautiful Beginnings as a line sold for children. You can read the state's complaint (PDF, 25 pages).

Arizona is asking the court for three things:

• An order stopping sales of these relaxers in Arizona unless they carry cancer warnings.
• Fines under Arizona's consumer fraud law, which allows up to $10,000 for each violation.
• Repayment to Arizona consumers.

L'Oréal told Consumer Reports that its products are safe and that the lawsuit has no legal or scientific merit. The company says the study behind the case called for more research and did not find that relaxers cause cancer. Reuters reported that Arizona is the first state to sue over hair relaxer cancer risk.

What the Arizona case means for women with cancer

Arizona brought this case as the state, on behalf of its residents as a whole. It is about how the products were sold and labeled in Arizona. Women diagnosed with cancer bring their own cases, for their own diagnosis and their own losses. Those cases continue in federal court and in several state courts.

Whether your own history supports a case depends on your diagnosis, the products you used, and when you used them. A free case review can look at those facts.

A separate track for women who have not been diagnosed

Most of this page is about women who were diagnosed with cancer. There is a second request in front of the judge that works differently.

Plaintiffs have asked the court to certify medical monitoring classes. A medical monitoring claim asks a company to pay for regular screening for people who were exposed to something and face a raised risk, before any diagnosis. The companies oppose it, and they have also asked the judge to throw out the doctors the plaintiffs rely on to support it. Briefing finished in early September 2026 and the judge has not ruled.

Whether this track goes anywhere is unsettled, and it is separate from an individual claim for a cancer diagnosis. Nothing about it has been decided.

Has there been a settlement?

No. There is no settlement, no fund, and nobody has been paid through this litigation.

A court-appointed official is still coordinating settlement talks across the federal cases and the state cases in Illinois, Philadelphia, Georgia and New York. Those talks have not produced anything announced.

The clearest public signal came on July 24, 2026, when the judge refused to extend the pause protecting one group of companies. They had asked for more time while private talks continued. The court put them back into the ordinary process instead, which means the case is moving forward rather than waiting on a deal.

Be careful with settlement figures

Because there is no settlement, there are no hair relaxer settlement amounts and no per-person payout figures. Any dollar figure you see quoted for this case is an estimate, or a comparison borrowed from a different lawsuit. No court has approved a number here.

In cases like this, values are usually not set until after the judge rules on the science and the first test trials happen. The first trial is set for September 7, 2027.

What these updates mean for a claim

Updates like these show whether a case is still growing, whether big rulings are going one way or the other, and whether trials are getting closer. What they do not do is predict what happens to any individual claim.

It is also worth separating two things. The case moving through court is one question. Whether the science shows hair relaxers cause cancer is a different one, and it is still contested. See Does Hair Relaxer Cause Cancer? for that.

What to watch next

The court reset this schedule in late August 2026, and four dates now matter more than the rest. By October 21, 2026 both sides must propose how to cut the ten test cases down to five. Expert evidence-gathering in those five closes on December 21, 2026. The motions that could narrow or end parts of the case are due January 11, 2027, with briefing on them finishing February 24, 2027. Those rulings will shape the litigation more than anything else on this list.

• Whether the number of filed cases keeps growing or starts to fall.
• Whether the September 7, 2027 trial date holds or moves.
• How the judge rules on which scientific evidence is allowed.
• Whether the second group of companies being sent back into evidence-gathering means settlement talks have stalled.
• Court orders that speed up or slow down the whole case.
• Whether the FDA finishes its formaldehyde rule. The agency proposed restricting formaldehyde in hair-smoothing and straightening products in 2023 and has missed its own deadlines, most recently in January 2026. The products stay on shelves while that sits unfinished.
• How L'Oréal answers Arizona's lawsuit, and whether other states bring their own.
• Whether state court cases, including fibroid claims, move on their own schedule.

When will the first trials start?

Courts handling thousands of similar cases pick a few to try first. Lawyers call them bellwether trials, and both sides watch them to work out what the evidence is worth and how juries react.

The first trial is set for September 7, 2027. The court has built its 2027 calendar around that date, with case management conferences scheduled every month from January through August.

The pool of cases has been narrowed twice and is about to be narrowed again. Thirty-two cases went into the first round of evidence-gathering, which closed on March 18, 2026. On April 2, 2026 the judge cut that group to ten. The two sides were ordered to propose a way to cut the ten down to five by October 21, 2026.

A date on the calendar is not a promise. Trial dates in cases this size move, and the judge still has to rule on which scientific evidence a jury may hear. That ruling could reshape what a trial looks like or whether it happens at all.

For background on the research the court is weighing, see The Hair Relaxer Cancer Studies, Explained.

How This Page Fits With Our Main Hair Relaxer Coverage

The main Hair Relaxer Cancer Lawsuit page explains the broader allegations, products, health concerns, and claim categories commonly discussed in this litigation. Four companion pages cover the science and health questions in plain English. Does Hair Relaxer Cause Cancer? takes the causation question directly. The Hair Relaxer Cancer Studies, Explained walks through the research. Hair Relaxers and Fibroids covers the separate fibroid claims. Are Hair Relaxers Safe? looks at the products themselves.

This page is narrower. It focuses on procedural developments and public case updates rather than the broader educational overview.

Related Lawsuit Topics

About the Author

David Meldofsky is a California-licensed attorney and the founder of Lawsuit Informer, an educational platform focused on helping people understand lawsuits, consumer safety issues, and legal rights related to defective products and toxic exposures.

Learn more about our Editorial Policy or Contact us.

Last Updated: October 4, 2026

Educational information only. Not legal advice. No attorney-client relationship is formed.