Milan Laser Hair Removal, the largest laser hair removal chain in the country, has been the subject of a federal wage-and-hour class action that settled in December 2023, a more recent telemarketing class action filed in 2025, an earlier disability discrimination suit resolved privately, and hundreds of consumer complaints centered on financing agreements and refund refusals. No public lawsuit against the company has centered on burn or scarring injuries, though that is the dominant claim type across the laser hair removal industry generally.
The Jacobson Wage-and-Hour Class Action
The largest legal action against Milan to date was filed in October 2021 by a former employee, Shelby Jacobson, in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin. The case was docketed as No. 2:21-cv-01242 and alleged violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act, the federal minimum-wage and overtime law.1PACER Monitor. Jacobson v. Milan Laser Corporate LLC Et Al Jacobson was represented by the Milwaukee employment firm Walcheske & Luzi LLC.2UniCourt. Jacobson v. Milan Laser Corporate LLC Et Al
The case never went to trial. On December 14, 2023, Judge William C. Griesbach held a telephone fairness hearing and granted final approval of the collective and class action settlement, along with a service award to Jacobson and attorneys’ fees and costs. The case was terminated the same day.1PACER Monitor. Jacobson v. Milan Laser Corporate LLC Et Al The settlement amount, class size, and per-person payout were not disclosed in the public docket.
Other Federal Cases
Two other federal cases are worth knowing about. In August 2019, Amanda Holt filed a job discrimination suit in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Iowa under the Americans with Disabilities Act. The case closed within four months when Holt filed a stipulation for dismissal with prejudice in December 2019, which typically signals a private resolution.3CourtListener. Holt v. Milan Laser Corporate LLC
More recently, Koffel v. Milan Laser Corporate LLC was filed in 2025 in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of North Carolina as a class action under the Telephone Consumer Protection Act, the federal statute restricting unwanted marketing calls and texts. The case was assigned to Judge Max O. Cogburn Jr.4Law360. Koffel v. Milan Laser Corporate LLC
Consumer Complaints About Financing and Cancellations
Most people searching for information about a Milan Laser lawsuit are not employees or class members; they are customers who feel stuck in an expensive contract. The company’s Better Business Bureau profile lists 379 complaints over the most recent three years, with 136 closed in the last twelve months. Billing disputes account for 184 of the 379.5Better Business Bureau. Milan Laser Hair Removal Complaints
The pattern that runs through those complaints: customers arrive for what they understood to be a free consultation and leave having signed a long-term financing agreement with a third-party lender. Complainants name PatientFi and Synchrony Bank as the lenders, with loan amounts reported from a few thousand dollars up to more than $14,000, and interest rates reported as high as 32%.5Better Business Bureau. Milan Laser Hair Removal Complaints6JustAnswer. Milan Laser Contract Consumer Question Customers who try to cancel soon after signing are typically told that all sales are final.
Milan’s formal position in BBB responses cites the purchase agreement’s no-refund language. In practice, the company has been more flexible than the contract suggests. In multiple complaints filed in early 2026, Milan reported that its client services team contacted the customer and authorized a refund for treatments not yet received once the customer said they wanted to stop.5Better Business Bureau. Milan Laser Hair Removal Complaints The company holds an A+ BBB rating and accreditation, with 143 of the 379 complaints marked resolved.
One trap worth knowing: according to Milan’s own BBB responses, disputing a charge through your bank or credit card company can increase the balance you owe to Milan rather than reduce it. Customers with an outstanding balance for treatments already received can remain liable even after cancelling the contract.
Injury Claims and the Industry Context
If you are searching because of a burn, scar, or pigmentation change after a Milan treatment, the public court record does not show a lawsuit against Milan on those grounds. That is worth stating clearly because silence can be misleading. It does not mean such claims do not exist; only that they are not part of the reported litigation covered here.
The broader industry picture is another matter. Laser hair removal is the most frequently litigated procedure in cutaneous laser surgery, making up roughly 36% to 64% of cases depending on the study period.7JAMA Network. Litigation in Cutaneous Laser Surgery Burns, scarring, and pigmentation changes dominate the alleged injuries. Roughly 71% of claims involve a nonphysician operator, such as a medical assistant, nurse, or aesthetician, and supervising physicians are commonly named as defendants under respondeat superior, the doctrine that holds employers liable for employees acting within the scope of their work.8American Society for Dermatologic Surgery. Causes of Injury and Litigation in Cutaneous Laser Surgery, Update From 2012 to 2020 Plaintiff wins at trial have averaged roughly $320,000 to $380,000, with individual awards reaching $2.1 million.
Milan’s clinics are corporate-owned rather than franchised, which means the company itself, not an independent operator, would be the direct defendant in any injury claim tied to one of its locations.