Playtex Tampons Lawsuit: TSS, PFAS, and Lead Claims

The Playtex tampons lawsuit history spans more than forty years and three distinct waves of claims: toxic shock syndrome cases in the 1980s that produced landmark verdicts, class actions filed in 2023 alleging PFAS “forever chemicals” in Playtex Gentle Glide tampons, and a more recent lead-contamination litigation wave that, so far, has not named Playtex as a defendant. Along the way, courts have shaped the rules for what a plaintiff can and cannot sue over when it comes to tampon labeling.

The Toxic Shock Syndrome Verdicts of the 1980s

The most consequential Playtex litigation grew out of the early-1980s public health crisis linking high-absorbency tampons to toxic shock syndrome, a rare bacterial infection that can cause organ failure and death. Families who lost relatives to TSS sued International Playtex, Inc., arguing the company knew its super-absorbent products carried heightened risk but did not warn consumers or redesign the products.

O’Gilvie v. International Playtex

The landmark case involved Betty O’Gilvie, a Kansas woman who died from TSS after using Playtex super-absorbent tampons. In February 1985, a federal jury in Wichita awarded her estate $250,000 for pain and suffering, her survivors $1.25 million in compensatory damages, and $10 million in punitive damages against International Playtex. The jury assigned 80 percent of the fault to Playtex and 20 percent to O’Gilvie’s family doctor.¹

Playtex had complied with FDA warning-label requirements. The jury concluded those federal standards were only a minimum and were inadequate to protect consumers. The trial judge said the jury was effectively telling Playtex to “take that damnable product off the market,” and he warned the president of Beatrice Company, then Playtex’s parent, that without changes the verdict was “only the beginning.”²

The appeals were tangled. In September 1986, the 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals initially overturned the judgment and ordered a new trial, ruling the jury should have been allowed to consider the victim’s own role and the possible contribution of other tampon manufacturers.¹ On further review, the court affirmed the underlying judgment and reinstated the original $10 million punitive award after the trial court had reduced it to $1.35 million based on Playtex’s decision to pull the products after the verdict. The 10th Circuit held that the trial court lacked authority to reduce the award based on post-verdict conduct. The U.S. Supreme Court declined to hear Playtex’s appeal.²

After the verdict, Playtex voluntarily removed the linked super-absorbent products, strengthened warnings on remaining tampon lines, and launched a public awareness campaign about TSS risks.²

Kelchner v. Playtex Family Products

Kathy Kelchner was 21 when she died of TSS on July 1, 1983. Her family sued Playtex Family Products Inc., and after an 11-day federal trial, a jury in September 1987 found that a defect in the synthetic polyacrylate fiber used in Playtex Super tampons was a “substantial contributing factor” in her death. The family was awarded $625,000 under the Survival Act for loss of earnings and pain and suffering, plus $10,000 in wrongful death damages to her parents.³

Playtex argued Kelchner had died of acute viral myocarditis, not TSS. Before the verdict, U.S. District Judge Edwin Kosik ruled the evidence was insufficient to support punitive damages, a decision Playtex publicly praised.⁴

Quillen v. International Playtex

Not every TSS suit succeeded. In Quillen v. International Playtex, decided by the Fourth Circuit in April 1986, the jury sided with the company. Laura Quillen developed TSS after using Playtex Super Plus Deodorant Tampons purchased in May 1983 and brought claims for negligent manufacturing, failure to warn, breach of warranty, and strict liability. The trial court dismissed the strict liability count under Virginia law, which did not recognize strict liability in tort, and directed a verdict for Playtex on several other theories. The jury found for Playtex on the remaining claims of failure to warn, breach of implied warranty of merchantability, and punitive damages. The Fourth Circuit affirmed.⁵

How Federal Preemption Limits Labeling Claims

Anyone considering a Playtex lawsuit today runs into a legal barrier set in 1988. Laura Meyer developed TSS in 1984 after using Playtex tampons and, with her husband, filed a nine-count complaint including negligence, breach of warranty, misrepresentation, strict liability, and negligent design.⁶

Playtex moved to dismiss the failure-to-warn counts, arguing state tort claims about tampon labeling were preempted by federal law. The company pointed to the Medical Device Amendments to the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act and to FDA regulations at 21 C.F.R. § 801.430. The court agreed, holding that state-law claims seeking to impose warning requirements “different from, or in addition to” the FDA’s rules were preempted. Meyer became an important precedent in medical-device litigation and is frequently cited by manufacturers seeking to block state failure-to-warn claims.⁶⁷

TSS Claims After the 1980s

The TSS docket did not close with the 1980s verdicts. In 2009, Katherine Neff filed a wrongful-death suit in Cook County Court after her 16-year-old daughter, Kelly Neff, died allegedly as a result of using Playtex Sport tampons. The complaint alleged the tampons contained a “dangerous mix of viscose rayon and cotton” and that Playtex targeted teens in advertising while failing to warn adequately about TSS risks, asserting that synthetic materials in the tampons were “unsafe for use by menstruating teenaged girls,” who reportedly lack the antibodies to resist TSS. The claims included wrongful death, product liability, negligence, and breach of warranty. The available record covers the filing but does not document a final outcome. Neff also filed a separate medical malpractice suit against Loyola University Health System, Silver Cross Hospital, and two physicians.⁸

In late 2015 and early 2016, the Michigan Department of Health and Human Services reported a cluster of five TSS cases, four of them involving women using Playtex Sport tampons. None were fatal. The FDA was notified, and state officials used the cluster as a reminder to review product safety information.⁹

The PFAS Class Actions and Their Dismissal

In February 2023, two class actions were filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California against Edgewell Personal Care Company, then the owner of the Playtex brand. Lowe v. Edgewell and Mack v. Edgewell alleged that Playtex Gentle Glide tampons contained per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances, commonly called PFAS or “forever chemicals.” The plaintiffs argued that marketing the products as “safe,” “gentle,” and “purified” was false and misleading because third-party testing had detected organic fluorine, which can serve as a proxy indicator for PFAS.¹⁰

On January 12, 2024, the court dismissed Lowe. The judge found the testing allegations “cursory and insufficiently specific.” The complaint did not specify how much organic fluorine was detected, did not explain whether the fluorine indicated PFAS rather than naturally occurring sources, and did not quantify PFAS levels or show the amounts were harmful. The court distinguished the case from other PFAS lawsuits in which plaintiffs had alleged contamination “above trace amounts.”¹⁰ The companion Mack case was stayed pending that ruling and was voluntarily dismissed with prejudice on March 10, 2025.¹¹

Where Playtex Stands in the Lead-Contamination Wave

A different front opened in July 2024, when UC Berkeley researchers published the first study to measure heavy metals in tampons. Published in Environment International, the study analyzed 30 tampons from 14 brands and detected measurable concentrations of all 16 metals tested, including lead, arsenic, and cadmium. Lead concentrations were higher in non-organic tampons, and arsenic was higher in organic ones. The study did not identify which brands had the highest levels and did not establish whether the metals leach out of tampons during use.¹²¹³

The study prompted class actions against Procter & Gamble over Tampax Pearl and Kimberly-Clark over U by Kotex Click in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California, alleging the products contain unsafe levels of lead and should carry warnings under California’s Proposition 65. No lead-contamination lawsuit has named Playtex or its corporate owners as defendants.¹⁴

In August 2025, U.S. District Judge Gonzalo P. Curiel allowed the bulk of the Tampax Pearl case to proceed. The court rejected Procter & Gamble’s argument that the FDA’s ongoing review of metals in tampons should take precedence, finding the plaintiffs’ claims were based on affirmative marketing representations rather than a simple failure to warn. The complaint was dismissed without prejudice, with the court ruling the plaintiffs needed to provide more detail about the testing they relied on, including who conducted it, when, and why results from “super” tampons could be extrapolated to other absorbency sizes.¹⁴ The Kimberly-Clark case remains ongoing.

Who Owns the Playtex Brand Now

For most of its litigation history, the Playtex tampon line was owned by International Playtex, Inc., later reorganized under Edgewell Personal Care Company. In November 2025, Swedish hygiene and health company Essity announced an agreement to acquire Edgewell’s feminine care business, including the global rights to the Playtex brand along with Carefree, Stayfree, and o.b. in North America, for $340 million. The acquisition closed on February 2, 2026, and included a production facility in Dover, Delaware.¹⁵ The publicly available deal documents do not address the transfer of any pending litigation.

1
Los Angeles Times. Toxic Shock Syndrome Case Against Playtex
2
Georgia Trial Lawyers Association. Toxic Shock Syndrome
3
UPI. Jury Awards $635,000 in Toxic Shock Suit
4
UPI. Jury Awards $635,000 in Toxic Shock Suit
5
Law.Resource.Org. Quillen v. International Playtex, Inc., 789 F.2d 1041
6
vLex. Meyer v. International Playtex, 724 F. Supp. 288
7
Leagle. Meyer v. International Playtex, Inc.
8
Courthouse News Service. Playtex Tampons Killed Her Daughter, Mom Says
9
Detroit Free Press. Toxic Shock Syndrome Tampon Michigan
10
Inside Class Actions. Court Dismisses Lawsuits Alleging Presence of PFAS in Tampon Products
11
Thompson Coburn. PFAS Primer Update Recent Developments Consumer Fraud Analysis
12
NPR. Tampons Heavy Metals Study
13
ScienceDirect. Tampons as a Potential Source of Exposure to Metal(loids)
14
AboutLawsuits.com. Tampon Class Action Lawsuit Lead Contamination Move Forward
15
Essity. Essity Completes the Acquisition of Edgewell’s Feminine Care Business