Defective Products and Discriminatory Censorship In our latest issue, we’ll tackle a handful of allegedly defective products (surprise, surprise) and the more delicate matter of how Google and YouTube may be unfairly censoring the LGBTQ+ community. As far as those faulty products go, we’ve got stories on Biocell breast implants potentially causing a type of non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma, Remington Hot Rollers causing more burns than voluptuous curls, and a $248 million settlement in the decade-old litigation involving Chinese drywall. We’ve got what you need to know, so read on for more. - Ty Armstrong, Writer/Community Manager |
| Allergan, Inc. was recently directed by the Food and Drug Administration to recall certain Biocell breast implants over concerns that they may cause cancer; however, many aren’t pleased with the recall, which only provides for the cost of replacement implants. Now, a proposed class action is looking to compensate patients for damages that weren’t provided by the recall, such as the cost of surgery to remove the implants, diagnostic testing, and medical monitoring. If you have one of several types of Allergan Natrelle saline-filled breast implants, Allergan Natrelle silicone-filled textured breast implants, and Natrelle 140 highly cohesive anatomically shaped silicone-filled breast implants, you may be able to help strengthen the ongoing litigation. Read more about the case here. |
Burn Risk: Remington Hot Rollers May Be Defective Remington Hot Rollers, brought to you by Spectrum Brands, Inc., may suffer from a defect that allows the hairstyling product to heat up to “unreasonably safe temperatures” even when used as instructed, a recently filed class action says. The suit further alleges that the product's so-called “Cool Touch Ends,” which are supposed to allow users to touch the end of each plastic roller without worry, can reach temperatures of up to 187 degrees Fahrenheit, leaving users with severe burns instead of the “long lasting curls and volume” they expected. Spectrum Brands has allegedly known about the defect for years and failed to do anything to remedy the situation. The full story can be found here. |
 Our settlements page is always being updated. Have you checked to see if you're covered by any open settlements? You can also check out the latest settlements as they happen by following us on Twitter. |
| Latest Settlements - Shellpoint Mortgage Force-Placed Insurance
This settlement may have you covered if you were charged for a lender-placed insurance policy by Shellpoint between March 1, 2014 and April 4, 2019. - USC Student Health Center
You may be included in this settlement if you were seen by Dr. Tyndall at the University of Southern California Student Health Center between August 14, 1989 and June 21, 2016. - Advanced Disposal Services
If you were a customer of Advanced Disposal and paid energy, fuel, administrative or environmental fees, you may be included in this settlement. | | |
To view a complete list of settlements and to find out how you can file a claim, click here. |
|
|---|
| | ~ In Other News ~ | A settlement has finally been reached in a series of cases involving allegedly defective Chinese drywall that was introduced into the market due to a shortage in building materials following Hurricanes Rita and Katrina. Homes constructed with the affected drywall between 2005 and 2008 reportedly began having problems, such as unpleasant odors and an increased rate of corrosion in pipes and appliances, shortly after installation. The suits claimed that sulfur gases emitting from the Chinese drywall were to blame – and now those affected finally have a resolution. If you had the drywall in your home, check out our blog on the settlement, which includes a link to the official settlement website. |
| A group of prominent LGBTQ+ content creators have filed a proposed class action against YouTube and Google over what they claim is “systematic and pervasive” discrimination against and suppression of the lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, transsexual and/or queer community. The plaintiffs behind the lawsuit argue that despite YouTube’s stance that those who use the site are all considered members of a public “YouTube Community” and subject to the same “viewpoint-neutral” content regulations, such freedoms are not afforded to LGBTQ+ YouTubers. According to the lawsuit, Google and YouTube brand LGBTQ+ content as “shocking,” “offensive,” and/or “sexually explicit” based on the content creators and not the content itself. Want to learn more? Here’s the rest of the story. |
~ Forward to a friend ~
Know someone who might be interested in our newsletter? Why not forward this email to them?
|
|---|
|
|
Please do not reply to this message.
Replies to this message are routed to an unmonitored mailbox. Thank you. |
