The hair relaxer lawsuit in Charleston, SC

CALL 24/7(888) 348-2735

Hair Relaxer Lawsuit — Free, Confidential Consultation

Hair relaxer lawsuit help for South Carolina women

Marin & Murphy Law Firm is licensed in South Carolina, and South Carolina’s filing deadline runs from when you knew or should have known. Two confidential minutes tell you where you stand.

Active litigation — no settlement. MDL 3060 underway · 12,381 cases pending · filing deadlines vary by state and run from when you knew or should have known.

Did you get relaxers — perms, the white cream — every few weeks, for years?

That one question decides most of it. It seems like nobody ever told you the risk was anything worse than a scalp burn.

See where I standfree · confidential · 2 minutes · an honest answer either way
What the lawsuit is actually about →

No receipts needed · you don’t have to remember every brand · no fee unless there is a recovery. Court costs and litigation expenses are advanced by counsel and repaid from the recovery. You are not responsible for court costs or litigation expenses if there is no recovery, unless a court directs otherwise. The attorney’s fee is a percentage of the gross recovery, calculated before expenses are deducted.

Or talk to a person now: (888) 348-2735 — answered 24/7

Marin & Murphy Law Firm

Every inquiry gets a personal review and a straight answer — including “not yet” or “no” — free and without obligation.

Claims are brought against the companies that made and sold chemical relaxers — not against your stylist, your salon, or the person who did your hair growing up. Conversations are confidential. Some matters may be referred to or handled with other law firms. No settlement has been announced and no trial has been held; every case depends on its own facts. This page does not diagnose anything. Attorney Advertising.

This page is about a lawsuit — it is legal information, not medical advice, and it does not diagnose anything. Questions about your health belong with your own doctor.

Lawsuits consolidated in federal court in Chicago (MDL 3060) allege that long-term use of chemical hair relaxers is associated with uterine cancer, ovarian cancer, and related conditions. As of October 2026 the cases are in pretrial proceedings; no trial has been held and no settlement has been announced. The allegations have not been proven, and each case depends on its own facts.

Marin & Murphy published this page; the directory sites that rank alongside it did not. No hair relaxer settlement has been announced and no one has been paid. Any page that quotes a dollar figure is estimating. What decides a Charleston claim is use, diagnosis, and timing — the three sections below.

Where a Charleston case is filed

A hair relaxer claim from Charleston is a federal case in the U.S. District Court for the District of South Carolina — the District of South Carolina’s Charleston Division sits at the J. Waties Waring Judicial Center. It is then transferred to the Northern District of Illinois, where every case in MDL 3060 is managed together before trial. Claims are screened from across the state, including Columbia and Greenville. No Charleston resident travels to Chicago for that.

What South Carolina law says about timing

One real clock runs in this litigation, and South Carolina law sets it, not the court in Chicago. South Carolina’s general limitations window for injury claims is as short as three years, and the clock generally starts when you knew — or reasonably should have known — that hair relaxer use caused your injury. Repose periods and claim-specific deadlines can also apply, so the only safe assumption is that your window is already running. No general products statute of repose was located for South Carolina. That start date is frequently contested for an illness diagnosed years after the last use. No page fixes it for one Charleston claim.

Who is being screened in Charleston

Most of the women in these cases were told the risk was a scalp burn, and nothing worse. The screen below asks how often the product was used, not how carefully — salon or kitchen sink makes no difference — and it takes about two minutes. Stopping years ago, forgetting brand names, keeping no boxes or receipts: each is ordinary, and none ends a review. The claim runs against the companies that made and sold the product, not against a salon, a stylist, or anyone’s own choices.

Screening starts with one use pattern and works outward.

What the studies show

The NIH Sister Study reported in 2022 that women using chemical straighteners more than four times a year were about twice as likely to develop uterine cancer Sister Study — by age 70, roughly 4 women in 100 against about 1.6 in 100 among women who did not use them. A 2021 analysis reported a comparable ovarian signal. Study findings and adverse-event reports describe associations; they are not verified causation.

Where the litigation stands

The Court selected ten bellwether trial cases itself on April 2, 2026. A defense motion to exclude the plaintiffs’ general-causation experts was briefed on June 16, 2026 and remains undecided. On July 24, 2026 the Court lifted the discovery stay on the Second Wave defendants: “It is time to litigate.” Cases have been dismissed for missed fact-sheet deadlines — a docket fact, not a countdown; the eligibility eligibility question is better answered than assumed. A Charleston review ends in an answer either way.

This page is legal information, not medical advice, and it does not diagnose anything. Questions about your health belong with your own doctor. Some matters may be referred to or handled with other law firms.

Frequently Asked Questions

Cases are handled on a contingent-fee basis: no fee unless there is a recovery. The attorney’s fee is a percentage of the gross recovery, calculated before case expenses are deducted. Case expenses are advanced by the firm and reimbursed to the firm out of the recovery only if there is a recovery. You have no liability for court costs or litigation expenses if there is no recovery, unless a court directs otherwise.