Blog

Jul 10, 2026

Talcum Powder Cancer Lawsuit — The Court of Session in Scotland, United Kingdom Approves Group Action Against Johnson & Johnson Over Asbestos-Contaminated Baby Powder Linked to Ovarian Cancer, Mesothelioma, Fallopian Tube and Peritoneal Cancer: Attorney911 Brings Ralph Manginello’s 27+ Years of Federal-Court Trial Practice to Toxic Tort and Product Liability Claims, We Pursue the Manufacturer and Its Talc Supply Chain, We Secure Product Containers, Internal Testing Records and Pathology Slides Before They Vanish, Lupe Peña the Former Insurance-Defense Insider Who Knows How the Corporate Claims Machine Values and Denies These Cases, FDA Cosmetic-Talc Oversight and the Asbestos Carcinogenicity Framework, Multi-Decade Cancer Latency Means the Discovery Rule and Statute of Limitations Are Running, the Firm Has Recovered $50M+ for Injury Victims and Millions in Wrongful-Death Cases — Free 24/7 Consultation, No Fee Unless We Win, Hablamos Español, 1-888-ATTY-911

Scotland’s Highest Civil Court Just Ruled That Johnson & Johnson Talcum Powder Cancer Claims Have a Real Prospect of Success If you used Johnson & Johnson baby powder for years — maybe decades — and then heard the word “cancer” in a doctor’s office, you may have wondered whether the two were connected. You may have seen headlines about lawsuits and filed the thought away. You may have assumed the claims were speculative, the kind of thing that sounds alarming but never goes anywhere in a courtroom. A court in Scotland just put that assumption to rest. The Court of Session — Scotland’s supreme civil court, sitting in Edinburgh — has formally approved a group legal action against Johnson & Johnson on behalf of approximately 300 people who developed cancer after using the company’s talc-based baby powder. The court ruled that these claims have a “real prospect of success” and that group proceedings are the appropriate way to deal with them. That is not a lawyer’s opinion on a website. It is a judge’s finding, issued after evaluating the scientific evidence, the factual record, and the legal foundation of the case. We are Attorney911 — The Manginello Law Firm, PLLC. We handle toxic tort and product liability cases for people who were harmed by products they trusted. This page explains what the Scottish ruling means for anyone in the United States who used J&J talc products and was later diagnosed with ovarian cancer, mesothelioma, fallopian tube cancer, or peritoneal cancer…

51 min read Read Article

Jul 10, 2026

PFAS Forever Chemicals & Childhood Leukemia Toxic Tort Claims in Los Angeles County, California — 125 Children Born 2000–2015 with PFOA and PFOS Detected in Newborn Blood at Birth Now Diagnosed with Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia, Attorney911 Pursues the PFAS Manufacturers, Industrial Dischargers and Water Utilities Behind the Contamination, Ralph Manginello’s 27+ Years of Federal-Court Trial Practice, Lupe Peña the Former Insurance-Defense Insider Who Knows How the Chemical Companies Value and Deny These Claims, We Secure the Newborn Dried Blood Spot Cards, Water-Utility Testing Records and Manufacturer Internal Documents Before Retention Schedules Destroy Them, EPA CERCLA Hazardous-Substance Designation for PFAS, California Proposition 65 and the Discovery Rule with Minor Tolling Mean the Limitations Clock May Still Be Running, Medical Monitoring and Punitive Damages Unbounded by MICRA in California Toxic Tort Cases, the Firm Has Recovered $50M+ for Injury Victims — Free 24/7 Consultation, No Fee Unless We Win, Hablamos Español, 1-888-ATTY-911

Los Angeles PFAS Forever Chemicals and Childhood Leukemia: Your Legal Rights After the UC Irvine Study You are sitting at a kitchen table in Los Angeles County, and your child has cancer. Acute lymphoblastic leukemia — the most common childhood cancer there is. You may have spent two years in and out of hospitals. You may still be there. And now you are reading that researchers found “forever chemicals” in the blood of newborns in Los Angeles County, and that the children who had more of those chemicals in their blood at birth were more likely to develop the exact leukemia your child is fighting. The questions come all at once. Was it the water? Was it something I used while I was pregnant? Could this have been prevented? And the one that keeps you up: did a company know, and say nothing? We are Attorney911 — The Manginello Law Firm. We handle toxic tort and environmental exposure cases, and we are writing this page for one person: the parent who just found this study and needs to understand, in plain language, what it means for their family’s legal rights. This page is legal information, not legal advice, and contacting us is free and confidential. Nothing here states or implies that we represent any family involved in this research or this incident. What we can do — and what we do below — is tell you exactly how California law treats a case like this, what evidence is dying right…

39 min read Read Article

Jul 10, 2026

Roundup Cancer & Products Liability Litigation After the Supreme Court’s FIFRA Preemption Ruling: Attorney911 Pursues Bayer AG and Monsanto for Glyphosate-Related Non-Hodgkin Lymphoma, We Pivot from the Now-Shielded Failure-to-Warn Theory to Design Defect, Active Concealment and Negligent-Testing Claims That May Survive, Seventy Percent of North America’s Roundup Is Manufactured in Muscatine Where Iowa Farmers Face Some of the Nation’s Highest Cancer Rates from Sustained Pesticide Exposure, Ralph Manginello’s 27+ Years of Federal-Court Trial Practice, Lupe Peña the Former Insurance-Defense Insider Who Knows How the Mega-Manufacturer’s Claims Machine Values and Denies Toxic-Exposure Cases, We Secure the Spray Records, Purchase Receipts, Farm Application Logs and Bayer Internal Corporate Documents Before They Are Destroyed, the Discovery Rule May Toll the Statute of Limitations for Latent Cancer Diagnoses, the Firm Has Recovered $50M+ for Injury Victims and Millions in Wrongful-Death Cases — Free 24/7 Consultation, No Fee Unless We Win, Hablamos Español, 1-888-ATTY-911

Iowa Roundup Cancer Lawsuit: What Legal Rights Remain After the Supreme Court’s Preemption Ruling If you are an Iowa farmer, an agricultural worker, a landscaper, or someone who worked at the plant in Muscatine where seventy percent of the Roundup sold in North America is manufactured — and you have been diagnosed with cancer — you are reading this at a specific and frightening moment. The Supreme Court of the United States has just ruled that Bayer cannot be sued for failing to warn people that the weedkiller Roundup could cause cancer. You may be hearing that ruling described as the end of the road. We need you to hear the whole truth before you decide that, because the ruling closes one door — the failure-to-warn door — and the company’s lawyers and the insurance adjusters are counting on you not knowing that other doors remain. This page is written by the trial team at Attorney911 to tell you, in plain language, exactly what the ruling does and does not do, what legal theories may still be available to you under Iowa law, what evidence you need to preserve right now before it legally disappears, and what your case may actually be worth when the right theory is matched to the right proof. We are a trial firm that takes toxic tort and product liability cases in Iowa, working with local counsel where required. The consultation is free. We do not get paid unless we win your case. And the…

41 min read Read Article

Jul 10, 2026

MassTort-National Talc-Asbestos Mesothelioma & Product Liability Attorneys: Attorney911 Pursues Johnson & Johnson and the Talc Manufacturers Behind Asbestos-Contaminated Cosmetics, Ralph Manginello’s 27+ Years of Federal-Court Trial Practice, the FDA Withdrew Its MoCRA-Mandated Asbestos Testing Rule Leaving Manufacturers on the Honor System, We Preserve Talc Product Samples and Lot Records for TEM and PLM Microscopic Testing Before They Degrade, Lupe Peña the Former Insurance-Defense Insider Who Knows How the Corporate Claims Machine Values and Denies These Cases, the Discovery Rule Tolls the Statute of Limitations Until Diagnosis Given Mesothelioma’s Decades-Long Latency, the Firm Has Recovered Millions in Wrongful-Death Cases — Free 24/7 Consultation, No Fee Unless We Win, Hablamos Español, 1-888-ATTY-911

The FDA Walked Away from Asbestos Testing in Talc — What That Means for Your Mesothelioma Case If you are reading this at 2 a.m. from a hospital room or a kitchen table covered in medical bills, you already know the hardest part: someone you love has mesothelioma, and you are trying to understand whether a powder you used for decades — a powder you were told was safe — is the reason. Now you are reading that the FDA withdrew the one rule Congress ordered it to write, the rule that would have forced cosmetics companies to test their talc for asbestos before it ever touched a shelf. And the question forming in your mind is the right one: if the government walked away from protecting us, who is left to answer for what happened? We are. The civil justice system is. And the FDA’s failure does not weaken your case — it sharpens it. Here is the first thing you need to hear: the absence of a testing rule does not mean the absence of a legal claim. It means the opposite. When the federal agency Congress charged with protecting consumers acknowledges the asbestos-in-talc risk, proposes a rule to address it, and then withdraws that rule under industry pressure — leaving manufacturers to operate on what one advocacy group rightly called an honor system — that regulatory gap becomes part of the story a jury hears. It proves that the companies knew the danger was real enough for…

42 min read Read Article

Jul 10, 2026

PFAS Forever Chemicals & Toxic Tort Attorneys — MassTort-National: EPA Rollback on Drinking Water Standards for Four PFAS Compounds Doesn’t Eliminate Manufacturer Liability, Attorney911 Pursues the Chemical Producers Behind PFAS Contamination Linked to Cancer, Immune Dysfunction and Developmental Harm, Ralph Manginello’s 27+ Years of Federal-Court Trial Practice, We Secure Blood Serum Testing, Water Sampling Data and Internal Corporate Documents Before the Evidence Window Closes, the Statute of Limitations Is Running Under the Discovery Rule for Latency-Period Disease, Lupe Peña the Former Insurance-Defense Insider, the Firm Has Recovered $50M+ for Injury Victims and Millions in Wrongful-Death Cases — Free 24/7 Consultation, No Fee Unless We Win, Hablamos Español, 1-888-ATTY-911

The EPA Just Rolled Back PFAS Protections — Your Legal Rights Did Not Roll Back With Them You may have heard the news: the federal government announced it is walking back some of the drinking-water limits it placed on “forever chemicals” — the per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) that have been detected in water systems across the country, including right here in Florida. The rollback rescinds or reconsiders federal limits for four specific PFAS compounds and extends the compliance deadline for two others. Environmental advocates called it a retreat. The administration called it “legally defensible and scientifically grounded.” If you live in the Tampa Bay area — if your family drank the water that Tampa Bay Water distributes, or if you or a loved one attended or worked at the University of South Florida campus where testing found PFAS at six times the recommended limit — you are probably not thinking about politics right now. You are thinking about what is in your blood. You are thinking about the kidney cancer diagnosis, the thyroid disease, the testicular cancer, the immune disorder that seemed to come from nowhere. You are wondering whether the government’s retreat means you have lost your chance to hold someone accountable. You have not. Here is the single most important thing this page will tell you: regulatory limits and civil liability are two separate systems. The EPA’s decision to relax drinking-water standards does not eliminate your right to sue the chemical manufacturers who discharged PFAS into your…

21 min read Read Article

Jul 10, 2026

PFAS Forever Chemicals in 105 of 107 Southeast Louisiana Tap Water Samples — Toxic Exposure & Environmental Contamination Attorneys, Attorney911 Brings Ralph Manginello’s 27+ Years of Federal-Court Trial Practice to the Seven-Parish Mississippi River Corridor from St. James to Plaquemines, We Pursue the PFAS Manufacturers, Industrial Dischargers and Water System Operators Behind the Contamination, Lead in 67% and Arsenic in 70% of Tested Homes with Salt Exceeding EPA Thresholds in Every Low-River Sample, Bioaccumulative Forever Chemicals Linked to Liver Damage, Thyroid Disease and Reduced Vaccine Response in Children, We Move to Secure Blood Serum PFAS Testing and Historical Water Utility Records Before the Preservation Clock Expires, Safe Drinking Water Act and Louisiana Environmental Quality Act Claims, Lupe Peña the Former Insurance-Defense Insider Who Knows How the Claims Machine Values and Denies These Cases, the Firm Has Recovered $50M+ for Injury Victims — Free 24/7 Consultation, No Fee Unless We Win, Hablamos Español, 1-888-ATTY-911

Your Drinking Water Has “Forever Chemicals” in It — What That Means for Your Family in Southeast Louisiana You just found out that the water coming out of your tap — the water you have been drinking, cooking with, making baby formula with, showering in — contains chemicals that do not break down. Not in the environment. Not in your body. A residential water quality study tested 107 homes across seven Southeast Louisiana parishes and found PFAS in 105 of them. Perfluorooctanoic acid appeared in 97.2 percent of the samples. Perfluorooctane sulfonic acid showed up in 72.9 percent. Arsenic was in 70 percent. Lead was in 67 percent. Every single sample taken during low Mississippi River water levels exceeded the EPA’s recommended salt thresholds. One sample in Plaquemines Parish measured 43 percent above the pending federal limit for PFAS. If you live in St. James, St. John the Baptist, St. Charles, Jefferson, Orleans, St. Bernard, or Plaquemines Parish, this is your kitchen table right now. You are looking at a glass of water and wondering whether it is safe to drink. You are wondering what this means for your children, whose developing immune systems the science says are especially vulnerable. You are wondering whether anyone can be held accountable for putting these chemicals in your water, or whether the rollback of federal protections means the companies that contaminated it will simply walk away. We are going to answer every one of those questions on this page. Not in generalities —…

44 min read Read Article

Jul 10, 2026

Roundup Non-Hodgkin Lymphoma Toxic Tort Claims After the Supreme Court Reversed John Durnell’s Missouri Jury Verdict — Attorney911 Pursues Bayer-Monsanto and Its Glyphosate Herbicide on Surviving Design-Defect, Fraud and Independent-Negligence Theories That May Outlast FIFRA Preemption, Ralph Manginello’s 27+ Years of Federal-Court Trial Practice, We Preserve Purchase Receipts, Product Containers and Two Decades of Exposure History Before the Evidence Fades, Lupe Peña the Former Insurance-Defense Insider Who Knows How the Corporate Claims Machine Values and Denies Cancer Cases, the Firm Has Recovered $50M+ for Injury Victims — Free 24/7 Consultation, No Fee Unless We Win, Hablamos Español, 1-888-ATTY-911

Missouri Roundup Ruling: What the Supreme Court’s 7-2 Monsanto Decision Means for Your Glyphosate Cancer Claim If you used Roundup for years and then heard the words “non-Hodgkin lymphoma” from an oncologist, you probably started looking into a lawsuit. And then you saw the news: the United States Supreme Court just handed Monsanto a 7-2 victory, ruling that the company cannot be sued in state court for failing to warn about cancer risks on its Roundup label. Your first thought was probably: is my case dead? We are Attorney911 — The Manginello Law Firm, PLLC. We are toxic tort lawyers who take Missouri cases, and we are writing this page for one person: the Missouri resident, farmer, groundskeeper, or homeowner who used Roundup, developed non-Hodgkin lymphoma, and now does not know whether they still have a legal path. The honest answer is more complicated than a headline — and more complicated than the chemical company’s victory lap suggests. The main road is blocked. But the main road was never the only road, and the people who tell you “it’s over” are the same people who wanted it over before you ever walked into a courtroom. The Supreme Court Just Ruled 7-2 for Monsanto — Here Is What That Actually Means The Supreme Court held that the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act — known as FIFRA — preempts state-law failure-to-warn claims about pesticide labels when the Environmental Protection Agency has not required the warning the plaintiff is seeking. In plain…

40 min read Read Article

Jul 10, 2026

St. Louis, Missouri Roundup Glyphosate Cancer & Product-Liability Attorneys — After the Supreme Court’s FIFRA Ruling Reversed John Durnell’s Verdict, Attorney911 Builds the Design-Defect and Negligent-Design Cases That Survive Preemption, We Pursue Bayer and the Monsanto Liability It Inherited Through Its $63 Billion Acquisition, Ralph Manginello’s 27+ Years of Federal-Court Trial Practice, Lupe Peña the Former Insurance-Defense Insider Who Knows How the Claims Machine Values and Denies Toxic-Exposure Cases, We Move to Preserve Exposure Records, Oncology Charts and Internal Corporate Documents Before the Spoliation Clock Runs, Non-Hodgkin’s Lymphoma From Decades of Glyphosate Use, Missouri’s Comparative-Fault Doctrine in Product-Liability Actions, the Firm Has Recovered $50M+ for Injury Victims — Free 24/7 Consultation, No Fee Unless We Win, Hablamos Español, 1-888-ATTY-911

St. Louis, Missouri Roundup Lawsuit: The Supreme Court Ruled — But Your Case May Not Be Over You just heard the news. The Supreme Court ruled against Roundup plaintiffs. Bayer’s stock jumped nearly twenty percent. The headlines say Bayer won. And if you or someone you love used Roundup for years and then heard the words “non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma” from an oncologist, you are sitting at a kitchen table right now wondering whether the law just walked away from you. It did not. Not fully. Not even close to fully. And we are going to tell you exactly why — because the difference between what the ruling did and what Bayer wants you to think it did is the difference between walking away from a valid case and fighting one that can still be won. We are Attorney911 — The Manginello Law Firm, PLLC. We handle toxic tort and product liability cases in Missouri and nationwide. What follows is not a press release. It is the analysis we would give you if you were sitting across from us, at no cost, hearing the truth about what the Supreme Court actually held and what it left untouched. Call us at 1-888-ATTY-911 and we will give you that conversation for real, any hour, in English or in Spanish. What the Supreme Court Actually Ruled — and What It Did Not Touch Here is the single most important sentence in this entire analysis: the Supreme Court’s ruling is narrowly limited to failure-to-warn claims. It…

49 min read Read Article

Jul 10, 2026

Roundup Non-Hodgkin’s Lymphoma Claims After the Supreme Court’s FIFRA Preemption Ruling: Missouri Plaintiff John Durnell’s $1.25 Million St. Louis Jury Verdict Jeopardized as the Court Holds EPA Labeling Preempts State Failure-to-Warn Suits — Attorney911 Pursues Bayer-Monsanto on Surviving Design Defect, Negligent Testing & Fraud Theories While Evaluating Claim Eligibility in the $7.25 Billion Settlement, Ralph Manginello’s 27+ Years of Federal-Court Trial Practice, Lupe Peña the Former Insurance-Defense Insider Who Knows How the Claims Machine Values and Denies Toxic-Tort Cases, We Preserve Exposure Records, Pathology Reports & Monsanto Internal Research Before They Vanish, Missouri’s Pure Comparative-Fault Rule With No Damages Cap in Product-Liability Actions, the Firm Has Recovered $50M+ for Injury Victims & Millions in Catastrophic Cases — Free 24/7 Consultation, No Fee Unless We Win, Hablamos Español, 1-888-ATTY-911

Missouri Roundup Cancer Claims After the Supreme Court’s FIFRA Preemption Ruling You heard the news and your stomach dropped. The Supreme Court ruled for Bayer. The headline said it — Roundup lawsuits are being reined in. And if you are one of the thousands of people in Missouri who used that weedkiller for years and then heard the words “non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma” from an oncologist, you probably thought your case just died on the steps of the Supreme Court. It did not. But the ground underneath it shifted, and how far it shifted depends on facts specific to your situation — the kind of facts that require a lawyer who has read the actual ruling, not the headline. Here is what we want you to understand before you read one more word of this page: the Supreme Court did not say Roundup is safe. It did not say glyphosate does not cause cancer. It did not say you cannot sue. It answered one narrow legal question — whether federal pesticide law blocks states from requiring a cancer warning on the label that the federal government never required — and seven of nine justices said yes to that one question. That answer closes one road. It does not close every road. And the $7.25 billion settlement Bayer announced is still on the table for many claimants, separate from anything the Supreme Court decided. We are Attorney911 — The Manginello Law Firm, PLLC. We handle toxic tort and product liability cases, and we…

41 min read Read Article

Jul 10, 2026

Roundup Cancer Lawsuits After the Supreme Court’s FIFRA Ruling — Attorney911 Fights for Missouri Glyphosate Victims with Non-Hodgkin’s Lymphoma, We Pursue Bayer AG and the Agrochemical Manufacturers Behind the Weedkiller at the Center of the Durnell Litigation, Ralph Manginello’s 27+ Years of Federal-Court Trial Practice, Lupe Peña the Former Insurance-Defense Insider Who Knows How Bayer’s Corporate Claims Team Values and Denies These Cases, We Preserve Exposure Records, Purchase Receipts and Oncology Files Before the Settlement Enrollment Window Closes, FIFRA Preemption Bars State Failure-to-Warn Claims but Design-Defect and Fraud Theories May Still Survive, the Firm Has Recovered $50M+ for Injury Victims — Free 24/7 Consultation, No Fee Unless We Win, Hablamos Español, 1-888-ATTY-911

Missouri Roundup Lawsuit After the Supreme Court’s FIFRA Preemption Ruling: What 67,000 Cancer Claimants Need to Know Now If you used Roundup and later heard the words non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma from a doctor — or someone you love did — you are reading this at a specific, frightening moment. The Supreme Court of the United States just ruled 7-2 that the company that made Roundup is not legally liable for failing to warn you about cancer risks on its label. Your phone is probably already buzzing with conflicting information: someone saying the case is over, someone else saying there is still money, a settlement flyer in the mail with a number that looks far smaller than what you heard people were getting. You need straight answers, and you need them from someone who has spent a career in this fight, not someone reading a press release. We are Attorney911 — The Manginello Law Firm, PLLC. We handle toxic tort and catastrophic injury cases, and we are writing to you as the senior trial team that would evaluate a case exactly like yours. We are not counsel in the Supreme Court case you just read about. We have not been retained by its parties. What we are is a firm that has spent over two decades in courtrooms — including federal court — and we know what a ruling like this does to real people’s claims, and just as importantly, what it does not do. Because here is the first thing you…

36 min read Read Article