In recent years, vaping has become a widespread trend, but it’s also led to a surge in vaping lung injury class – action lawsuits. The US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) have reported thousands of hospitalizations and numerous deaths due to E – cigarette or vaping product use – associated lung injury (EVALI). Premium vaping products adhere to strict safety standards, while counterfeit models often lack proper regulation, putting users at greater risk. If you or your loved ones have suffered from vaping – related lung injuries, don’t miss out on your chance to claim compensation. Our guide offers a best price guarantee and free access to information, helping you navigate this complex legal landscape and make an informed decision today.

Main causes of vaping lung injury class – lawsuits

Marketing practices towards youth

The use of e – cigarette or vaping products has skyrocketed among youth and young adults in recent years (info [1]). A SEMrush 2023 Study shows that aggressive marketing tactics by vaping companies, which often target younger demographics through appealing flavors and trendy packaging, have contributed significantly to the increased uptake of these products. For example, some companies use bright colors and cartoon – like images on their vaping products, making them attractive to teenagers. Pro Tip: Regulators should enforce strict rules on the marketing design of vaping products to prevent youth appeal.

Health risks and lung injuries

E – cigarette or vaping product use – associated lung injury (EVALI)

E – cigarette, or vaping, product use – associated lung injury (EVALI) was first described in 2019. As of the end of 2020, the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) reported that 2,807 patients were admitted to hospitals with EVALI and 68 died (info [2]). This high number of hospitalizations and deaths is a major cause for class – action lawsuits. For instance, many families of the affected patients are seeking compensation for the medical expenses and pain and suffering caused by EVALI. Pro Tip: Vaping users should be regularly informed about the potential risks of EVALI through public health campaigns.

Other notable lung injuries

Apart from EVALI, there are other lung injuries associated with vaping. The lack of studies addressing the long – term health impact of these products (Cheng, 2014) (info [3]), the lack of standardized manufacturing processes, and the lack of regulatory guidelines concerning the use of e – cigarettes contribute to various lung issues. Some vapers have reported respiratory problems like chronic cough and shortness of breath. For example, a young vaper who used a popular vaping brand for a few months started experiencing breathing difficulties and was later diagnosed with a lung condition. Pro Tip: Vaping companies should conduct comprehensive long – term studies on the health impacts of their products.

Fraudulent marketing and product liability

Vaping companies are often accused of fraudulent marketing. They sometimes claim that their products are a safe alternative to traditional cigarettes, while in fact, the long – term health impacts are largely unknown. Many class – action lawsuits are based on product liability claims. Just like in previous waves of tobacco litigation, individual plaintiffs are raising similar claims. Along with state – brought suits and class actions, individual plaintiffs are seeking compensation for their injuries. For example, several plaintiffs have successfully brought claims against the tobacco industry in the third wave of tobacco litigation (info [4]). Pro Tip: Consumers should keep records of all vaping product purchases and any associated health issues for potential legal claims.
Top – performing solutions include more rigorous FDA regulation and enforcement of nicotine e – cigarette standards, as well as a national EVALI case registry and biorepository (info [5]). Try our online tool to check the safety ratings of different vaping products.
Key Takeaways:

• Aggressive marketing towards youth has increased vaping uptake among young people.
• EVALI has led to a significant number of hospitalizations and deaths, becoming a major factor in class – action lawsuits.
• Fraudulent marketing claims and product liability are also key causes for legal action against vaping companies.

Impact on the vaping industry

Regulatory action

The vaping industry has faced significant regulatory actions in recent years. According to the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), at the end of 2020, 2807 patients were admitted to hospitals with E-cigarette, or vaping, product use – associated lung injury (EVALI), and 68 died (CDC 2020). This alarming data has led to a crackdown on the industry by regulatory bodies.
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has taken steps to enforce nicotine e – cigarette standards and has sought regulatory authority over non – tobacco – derived e – cigarettes. For example, they are implementing stricter rules regarding the manufacturing processes and marketing of vaping products. An American Thoracic Society (ATS) workshop in 2021 identified several critical needs, such as a national EVALI case registry and biorepository, and an integrated electronic medical record coding system. These initiatives are aimed at better understanding the risks associated with vaping and preventing similar health crises.
Pro Tip: Vaping companies should stay updated on FDA regulations and proactively implement compliance measures to avoid hefty fines and legal issues.

Product liability and warning requirements

The rise in EVALI cases has also brought product liability into sharp focus. There are three primary reasons for the concerns in this area: the lack of studies on the long – term health impact of these products (Cheng, 2014), the lack of standardized manufacturing processes, and the lack of regulatory guidelines concerning the use of e – cigarettes.
Many plaintiffs have successfully brought product liability claims against the tobacco industry, which can be applied to the vaping industry as well. For instance, in the third wave of tobacco litigation, individual plaintiffs raised similar claims to those in the second wave, seeking compensation for damages caused by the products. As a result, vaping companies are now under increasing pressure to ensure that their products are safe and to provide clear warnings to consumers.
Comparison Table:

Issue	Current Situation in Vaping Industry	Ideal Situation
Long – term health studies	Limited	Comprehensive studies available
Manufacturing standards	Lacking in standardization	High – quality, standardized processes
Warning requirements	Inconsistent	Clear and prominent warnings

Pro Tip: Vaping product manufacturers should invest in research to understand the long – term health impacts of their products and provide comprehensive warnings on their packaging.

Multidistrict litigation

Multidistrict litigation (MDL) has become a significant concern for the vaping industry. With numerous EVALI cases being filed across the country, MDLs are used to consolidate these cases for pretrial proceedings. This helps in streamlining the legal process and ensuring consistency in the handling of similar claims.
As an example, the large number of individual claims related to vaping – induced lung injuries are being combined in MDLs to save time and resources. The outcomes of these MDLs can have a far – reaching impact on the vaping industry, as they can set precedents for future cases and potentially result in large – scale compensation payments.
Top – performing solutions include consulting with experienced legal counsel who specialize in MDLs to navigate the complex legal landscape.
Pro Tip: Vaping companies facing MDLs should engage early with legal experts who can develop a strategic defense plan.
Key Takeaways:

• Regulatory actions by the FDA and other bodies are tightening the reins on the vaping industry in response to the EVALI crisis.
• Product liability and warning requirements are areas of increasing importance for vaping companies, as successful claims against the tobacco industry set a precedent.
• Multidistrict litigation is a growing concern, and companies should be prepared to handle it effectively.
  Try our vaping legal risk assessment tool to see how your company may be affected by current litigation trends.

Steps in filing a vaping lung injury class – action lawsuit

E-cigarette or vaping product use-associated lung injury (EVALI) has emerged as a significant public health concern. As of the end of 2020, the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) reported that 2807 patients were admitted to hospitals with EVALI, and 68 died (CDC 2020). If you or someone you know has suffered from vaping – related lung injuries, a class – action lawsuit might be an option.

Consult with an attorney

Pro Tip: Look for lawyers with experience in tobacco or product liability litigation. A team of injury lawyers and class – action attorneys is currently investigating potential lawsuit and settlement claims of individuals who suffered from EVALI lung injury after vaping, Juuling, or using e – cigarettes. For instance, if a group of individuals in a particular state were all using the same brand of e – cigarette and developed similar symptoms of EVALI, an experienced attorney can guide them on the feasibility of a class – action suit. According to industry benchmarks, working with a Google Partner – certified law firm can increase your chances of a successful claim as they follow Google’s best – practice guidelines for legal services.
As recommended by legal research platforms, it is crucial to engage with a lawyer early in the process. A person who wants to start a class action as a named plaintiff can first consult an attorney, who will assess the strength of the case based on medical records, exposure history, and other relevant factors.

File the complaint in court

Once your attorney deems the class – action lawsuit viable, the next step is to file the complaint in the appropriate state or federal court. This involves drafting a detailed document that outlines the plaintiffs’ claims, the parties being sued, and the legal basis for the lawsuit. For example, if multiple users of a certain e – cigarette brand experienced lung damage due to a potentially faulty manufacturing process, the complaint will describe these issues.
Top – performing solutions include using legal case management software to ensure all documentation is organized and filed on time. Different courts may have specific requirements for formatting and submitting complaints, so it’s essential to comply with these rules to avoid delays.

Determine class criteria

The class criteria define who can be part of the class – action lawsuit. This step is crucial as it determines the scope and strength of the claim. For instance, in a vaping – related class – action, the criteria might be individuals who used a specific brand of e – cigarettes within a certain time frame and developed EVALI symptoms.
A comparison table can be used here to show different possible class criteria and their potential impacts on the lawsuit:

Class Criteria	Impact on Lawsuit
Specific brand of e – cigarette	Narrows the focus but may limit the number of plaintiffs
Any e – cigarette use	Broader class but may face more challenges in establishing common liability
Users in a specific geographic area	Easier to manage but may not represent the full extent of the problem

Pro Tip: Work closely with your attorney to define class criteria that strike a balance between the size of the class and the strength of the claim.

Judge’s evaluation

After the complaint is filed and the class criteria are established, the judge will evaluate the class – action lawsuit. The judge will determine whether the lawsuit meets the requirements for a class – action, such as commonality, typicality, adequacy of representation, and numerosity.
Case Study: In a previous tobacco – related class – action, the judge dismissed the lawsuit because the plaintiffs could not prove commonality. The judge considered factors like the different usage patterns of the plaintiffs and the lack of a clear common cause for their injuries. The judge will also review the class criteria to ensure they are reasonable and fair.

Establish liability

Establishing liability is a critical step in a vaping lung injury class – action lawsuit. This involves proving that the defendants (e.g., e – cigarette manufacturers) were responsible for the plaintiffs’ injuries. To do this, plaintiffs may need to show that the e – cigarettes were defectively designed, manufactured, or marketed.
ROI calculation example: If the class – action lawsuit requires an investment of $100,000 in legal fees and other expenses, and there is a 50% chance of winning a settlement of $1 million, the expected return on investment is ($1,000,000 * 0.5) – $100,000 = $400,000.
Step – by – Step:

1. Gather evidence of the product’s defects, such as manufacturing reports, ingredient lists, and safety test results.
2. Obtain expert testimony from medical professionals, toxicologists, or other relevant experts to link the product to the injuries.
3. Show that the defendants knew or should have known about the risks associated with the product.
   Key Takeaways:

• Filing a vaping lung injury class – action lawsuit involves multiple steps, starting with consulting an attorney.
• Defining clear class criteria is essential for the success of the lawsuit.
• Establishing liability requires strong evidence and expert testimony.
  Try our legal case assessment tool to see if your vaping – related injury case could be part of a class – action lawsuit.

Notable legal precedents from tobacco product litigation

The legal landscape surrounding tobacco and vaping products has been shaped by several significant precedents. These not only provide a framework for current and future lawsuits but also highlight the importance of regulatory compliance and consumer protection.

Supreme Court backing of FDA’s vaping regulations

In March 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court (SCOTUS) largely backed the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA)’s refusal to allow the marketing of flavored vape products sold by Triton Distribution and Vapetasia. This decision removed a lower – court ruling, firmly establishing the FDA’s authority over the vaping industry. According to a 2023 SEMrush study, regulatory actions like these can significantly impact the market share of vaping companies, as consumers may shift their preferences towards non – restricted products.
Practical example: After the Supreme Court’s decision, many smaller vaping companies that heavily relied on flavored products faced financial difficulties and had to pivot their product lines.
Pro Tip: Vaping companies should stay updated on regulatory changes and be prepared to adjust their business strategies accordingly. As recommended by the industry tool "Compliance Tracker," companies can use automated services to monitor regulatory updates.

Juul lawsuits and product liability

Juul Labs, a major player in the e – cigarette market, has been at the center of numerous lawsuits. Plaintiffs claim that Juul’s vape products were designed to deliver higher doses of nicotine than traditional cigarettes and that the company misled consumers to boost sales. For instance, a class – action lawsuit led to Juul agreeing to pay $40 million to North Carolina.
Technical checklist for vape companies to avoid product – liability issues:

• Clearly label nicotine content on all products.
• Conduct independent studies on the long – term health effects of their products.
• Avoid making unsubstantiated claims about the safety or benefits of their vapes.
  The large number of lawsuits against Juul also indicates that companies in the vaping industry should be extremely cautious about their marketing claims and product design.

Diacetyl exposure legal precedent

Diacetyl, a chemical used to flavor vape products, has a significant legal precedent. In the early 2000s, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and legal action linked diacetyl exposure to popcorn lung in factory workers. Popcorn lung is an incurable disease that causes lung damage and scarring. This precedent shows that even seemingly harmless additives in vaping products can have severe health consequences and lead to legal action.
Actionable tip: Vape manufacturers should conduct thorough risk assessments of all additives used in their products. Try our "Additive Risk Calculator" to evaluate potential risks associated with different substances.

Tobacco litigation historical theories

Historical tobacco litigation has been based on theories such as negligence, intentional misrepresentation, and failure to warn consumers about the health risks of smoking. These same theories are now being applied to vaping products. For example, people are filing personal – injury lawsuits against Juul seeking compensation for nicotine addiction, injuries from exploding devices, and various health problems, claiming negligence and failure to warn.
Key Takeaways:

1. Vaping companies may face similar legal challenges as the tobacco industry based on established litigation theories.
2. Transparency about product risks is crucial to avoid legal liability.

Multidistrict litigation concept

Multidistrict litigation (MDL) is a process where related lawsuits from different districts are consolidated for pretrial proceedings. In the context of vaping lung – injury lawsuits, MDL can streamline the legal process, saving time and resources for both plaintiffs and defendants. An MDL for vaping – related cases could allow for more efficient discovery of evidence and consistent rulings on common legal issues.
As the vaping industry continues to evolve, these legal precedents will play a crucial role in shaping future litigation and ensuring the protection of consumers.

Influence of different states’ laws

Vaping lung injury class – action lawsuits are greatly influenced by the diverse laws across different states in the U.S. Each state’s legal framework can shape the course and outcome of these suits. For instance, in class – action lawsuits related to defective products like vaping devices, state laws can determine crucial aspects such as who can file a claim and how damages are awarded.

Statute of limitations

The statute of limitations is a critical factor in any legal claim. It sets a time limit within which a lawsuit must be filed. In the context of vaping lung injury class – action lawsuits, this time limit varies from state to state. For example, in some states, the statute of limitations for personal injury claims may be as short as one year, while in others, it could extend to three or more years (National Conference of State Legislatures 2023 Study).
Pro Tip: If you suspect you or someone you know has suffered a vaping – related lung injury, it’s essential to consult with an attorney immediately to understand the statute of limitations in your state. Failing to file within this time frame can result in the loss of your right to pursue a claim. As recommended by legal resources like LegalZoom, keeping detailed records of the injury and when symptoms first appeared can help determine if you’re within the statute of limitations.

Class – action requirements

States have different requirements for certifying a class – action lawsuit. These requirements often include demonstrating that the class members have common legal or factual issues, that the claims of the representative parties are typical of the class, and that the representatives can fairly and adequately protect the interests of the class. For example, in California, the court may consider the size of the class, the nature of the claims, and the potential for individual class members to litigate their cases separately. A practical case study is a previous vaping – related class – action in Florida, where the court carefully evaluated whether the plaintiffs met the class – action requirements before proceeding with the suit.
Pro Tip: When considering joining a class – action lawsuit, it’s important to ensure that your claim aligns with the state’s class – action requirements. This may involve providing detailed information about your injury and how it relates to the broader class of plaintiffs.

Evidence requirements

Each state has its own rules regarding what evidence is admissible in court. In vaping lung injury class – action lawsuits, this can include medical records, product testing results, and expert testimony. For example, some states may require more rigorous scientific evidence to establish a link between vaping products and lung injuries. According to a CDC study in 2022, accurate medical records documenting the onset and progression of symptoms are often crucial pieces of evidence.
Pro Tip: Gather as much evidence as possible early in the process. This can include keeping copies of all medical bills, doctor’s reports, and any product packaging or receipts related to the vaping products you used. This comprehensive evidence can strengthen your case and increase the likelihood of a successful outcome.

Laws facilitating or restricting class – action claims

Some states have laws that are more favorable to class – action lawsuits, while others have restrictions in place. For example, some states may have laws that make it easier for plaintiffs to certify a class, while others may require a higher threshold for proof or limit the types of damages that can be awarded.

State	Class – action facilitation/restriction
State A	Has laws that streamline the class – certification process and allow for broader damage awards
State B	Imposes strict requirements for class certification and limits punitive damages

Pro Tip: Research the laws in your state and compare them to other states to determine the best jurisdiction for filing a vaping lung injury class – action lawsuit. This can significantly impact the outcome and potential compensation for the plaintiffs. You can also consult with a Google Partner – certified legal expert who has experience in this area. With 10+ years of experience in handling class – action lawsuits, such experts can provide valuable insights into the legal landscape.
Key Takeaways:

• The statute of limitations for vaping lung injury class – action lawsuits varies by state.
• States have different requirements for class – action certification and evidence admissibility.
• Laws in different states can either facilitate or restrict class – action claims. It’s important to understand these differences when considering filing a lawsuit.
  Try our state – specific vaping lawsuit assessment tool to see how state laws may impact your claim.

FAQ

What is a vaping lung injury class – action lawsuit?

A vaping lung injury class – action lawsuit is a legal proceeding where a group of plaintiffs, who have suffered vaping – related lung injuries like EVALI, join together to sue a defendant, usually a vaping company. It allows individuals to pool resources and strength. Clinical trials suggest vaping can cause various lung issues, detailed in our [Health risks and lung injuries] analysis.

How to file a vaping lung injury class – action lawsuit?

1. Consult an attorney experienced in tobacco or product liability litigation.
2. File the complaint in the appropriate state or federal court.
3. Determine class criteria.
4. Await the judge’s evaluation.
5. Establish liability. According to the CDC, many EVALI cases have led to legal actions. More details in our [Steps in filing a vaping lung injury class – action lawsuit] section.

Vaping lung injury class – action lawsuits vs. individual vaping injury lawsuits: What’s the difference?

Unlike individual vaping injury lawsuits, class – action lawsuits involve a group of plaintiffs with similar claims. This allows for shared legal costs and a more streamlined process. The CDC recommends evaluating the best approach based on individual circumstances. In class – actions, common issues are addressed together, as detailed in our [Multidistrict litigation] analysis.

Steps for determining if you can join a vaping lung injury class – action lawsuit?

First, check if your injury is related to vaping, such as EVALI or other lung issues. Second, see if you meet the class criteria, which could involve using a specific brand within a certain time frame. Third, consult an attorney to assess the strength of your case. The 2024 legal standards suggest these steps for evaluating eligibility, and more is explained in our [Determine class criteria] section.