Case Filings Alert™ reports daily on new cases filed in courts around the country, alerting you to significant new cases at the beginning of the litigation process, long before the case is settled or a decision handed down. A wide range of topics are covered, including product liability, intellectual property, antitrust, among others. A number of these cases, particularly the product liability litigation, will develop into mass torts as new cases raising similar issues are filed. Mass torts are covered in our report MDLCases.com, which deals with major multidistrict litigation (MDL) cases. Also see our litigation reports: Social Media Addiction, Copyright-Litigation.com, and Litigation Report 2026. Editor: Robert S. Want (rwant@LegalEditor.com).
March 6, 2026 – Constitution
States File Lawsuit Against Trump Administration Over New Tariff Scheme
A coalition of more than 20 states has filed suit in the U.S. Court of International Trade challenging President Donald Trump’s new tariffs, levied after the Supreme Court ruled against previous tariffs — the states arguing that the administration unlawfully imposed the new tariffs under a rarely used trade statute and usurped Congress’s constitutional authority over taxation.
In a complaint filed in the Court of International Trade, the states contend that the Constitution assigns tariff authority to Congress, not the president. The states assert that the administration has “imposed, modified, escalated, and suspended tariffs” by executive order, without legal authority to do so.
According to the lawsuit, Trump imposed a 10% tariff on most imports under Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974 immediately after the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that a different statute, the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, did not authorize tariffs. In their suit, the states argue that Section 122 allows tariffs only to address “large and serious balance-of-payments deficits” or similar currency crises tied to fixed exchange-rate systems that ended in the 1970s. They say the administration improperly equated the nation’s trade deficit with a balance-of-payments deficit, a distinction the complaint calls fundamental.
March 5, 2026 – Product Liability
Lawsuit Claims Heated Insoles Caught Fire, Resulting in ‘Catastrophic’ Injuries
Plaintiff alleges that a rechargeable heated insole, manufactured by China-based Tajarly, suddenly ignited inside his work boot, causing catastrophic burn injuries and permanent nerve damage.
Heated insoles are battery-powered inserts designed to be placed inside boots or shoes to provide adjustable warmth during cold weather, according to the complaint filed in federal court in the District of Idaho. The products are typically powered by rechargeable lithium-ion batteries and marketed as ideal for skiing, hunting, outdoor labor, and other winter activities.
In his complaint, the plaintiff says that he purchased a pair of Tajarly-heated insoles from Amazon.com in November 2023. After charging the insoles as instructed, he says he wore them to work, where he performed repairs on farm equipment in his shop. Within hours, the complaint states, plaintiff experienced intense burning pain in his right foot. When he looked down, he allegedly saw smoke and flames coming from inside his boot. Plaintiff says he was able to extinguish the flames and remove his boot, but not before suffering severe burns from the heated insole.
March 4, 2026 – Consumer Fraud
Texas AG Sues Wi-Fi Company Over Alleged Links to China
Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton has filed a lawsuit against Wi-Fi giant TP-Link Systems Inc., accusing it of deceiving consumers about its ties to China and misrepresenting the security of its devices.
In 2024, China-based technology company TP-Link split into two separate entities, with the U.S.-based TP-Link Systems Inc. taking over the global operations, while TP-LINK Technologies Co. maintained control of TP-Link’s operations in China, according to the complaint filed in Collin County (Texas) District Court. In the suit, Paxton says that since the split, TP-Link Systems Inc. has represented that its products are produced in Vietnam and don’t have any ties to China, which Paxton says misleads consumers in violation of the Texas Deceptive Trade Practices Act. A substantial portion of American homes use TP-Link Wi-Fi routers, the complaint notes.
“Behind TP-Link’s ‘Made in Vietnam’ stickers is a supply chain deeply entrenched in China, where nearly all of TP-Link’s components are sourced before being shipped to Vietnam for mere final assembly,” the suit alleges. “TP-Link has created a web of deception that includes shared manufacturing, research, and Chinese state-sponsored benefits, with the company’s leadership acknowledging accolades and subsidies from the Chinese government.”
March 3, 2026 – Administrative Procedure Act
Trump Administration ‘Erased History and Science’ at National Parks, Lawsuit Argues
A coalition of conservation, history, and science organizations has sued the Trump administration, alleging it has unlawfully removed exhibits and interpretive materials from national parks to comply with an administration executive order aimed at “Restoring Truth and Sanity to American History.”
Filed in Boston federal court, the lawsuit claims that the Department of the Interior and National Park Service launched a “sustained campaign to erase history and undermine science” at federally managed sites, in violation of the Administrative Procedures Act (APA).
Plaintiffs contend that the administration’s actions violate the APA by failing to comply with congressional mandates that require parks to “reflect current scientific and academic research” and serve “the benefit and inspiration of all the people of the United States.” According to the complaint, officials removed exhibits addressing slavery at Philadelphia’s Independence National Historical Park, climate change impacts at Fort Sumter, and Indigenous history at parks including Acadia. One removed exhibit examined “the paradox between slavery and freedom in the founding of the nation.”
March 2, 2026 – Product Liability
Royal Caribbean Sued Over Surf Simulator Injuries
A Pennsylvania man has sued Royal Caribbean Cruises Ltd., alleging that he suffered catastrophic injuries after falling while using the cruise line’s FlowRider surfing simulator and then received negligent medical care aboard the ship.
Plaintiff says he was injured in February 2025, while riding the FlowRider on the Adventure of the Seas in navigable waters, fracturing his neck and later suffering multiple strokes. Plaintiff “violently fell, headfirst,” and now has left-side weakness and other lasting complications, according to the complaint filed in Miami federal court.
The lawsuit claims that Royal Caribbean modified the FlowRider to fit onboard by shortening its length, making it “unreasonably dangerous” because riders can be propelled into a back wall at high velocity. The suit also alleges the company failed to provide adequate instruction or warnings, despite knowing that “passenger injuries due to participating in the FlowRider … are occurring at a high rate.”
February 27, 2026 – Consumer Fraud
Estée Lauder Accuses Walmart of Selling Counterfeit Beauty Products
Estée Lauder and five affiliated luxury beauty brands have sued Walmart in Los Angeles federal court, alleging that the company allowed counterfeit skincare, cosmetics, and fragrance products bearing the plaintiffs’ trademarks to be sold through the Walmart online marketplace.
The complaint — filed by Estée Lauder, Le Labo, La Mer, Clinique, Aveda, and Tom Ford — accuses Walmart and its e-commerce arm of trademark infringement, false designation of origin, and unfair competition under federal and state law. Walmart permitted third-party sellers to market and sell products that were “not genuine” and bore marks “identical with, substantially indistinguishable from, or confusingly similar to” the companies’ registered trademarks, according to the complaint.
Plaintiffs claim that consumers would reasonably believe Walmart itself was the seller because purchases were processed through Walmart’s website and checkout system. Further, the suit alleges, Walmart used the luxury brands’ trademarks in search engine optimization tools to drive traffic to the accused products and exercised significant control over payments, fulfillment, and returns. As a result, consumers were allegedly misled about the source, authenticity, and approval of the products, the complaint states.
February 26, 2026 – Securities
Investor Sues BlackRock Executives Over Alleged Coal Output Scheme
A BlackRock shareholder has filed a derivative lawsuit accusing the asset manager’s top executives and board members of violating securities laws and breaching fiduciary duties by allegedly orchestrating an anticompetitive campaign to suppress U.S. coal production in pursuit of climate goals.
The complaint, filed in federal court in the Eastern District of Texas, alleges that BlackRock used its large ownership stakes and proxy voting power to pressure coal companies to cut output in line with “net zero” emissions targets. The suit claims that BlackRock was not a passive investor but instead “actively used proxy voting, board engagement, and coordinated pressure campaigns” to force production reductions.
Publicly traded coal companies in which BlackRock held major stakes reduced thermal coal output by 19.2% between 2019 and 2022, even as demand and prices rose, according to the complaint. Plaintiff shareholder calls the result “a classic cartel outcome: reduced industry-wide output despite rising prices,” alleging consumers paid higher electricity costs as a result. The suit notes that thirteen states have already sued BlackRock and other asset managers over similar allegations, and a federal judge in August 2025 allowed much of that case to proceed.
February 25, 2026 – Environment
Environmental Group Sues Interior Dep’t Over Gray Wolf Recovery Plan
The Center for Biological Diversity has sued the U.S. Department of the Interior and the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service, alleging that federal officials unlawfully failed to develop a national recovery plan for gray wolves despite a statutory mandate under the Endangered Species Act.
Fish & Wildlife has repeatedly tried to weaken or remove protections for gray wolves using outdated, piecemeal recovery plans that fail to address the species as currently listed, according to the lawsuit filed in federal court in Washington, D.C. The complaint says that the agency is required to “develop and implement” recovery plans unless such plans would not promote conservation.
In its suit, the center points to a 2023 court ruling that Fish & Wildlife “must create a recovery plan for the species it has listed” and cannot rely on subspecies plans that “straightforwardly do not satisfy” the Endangered Species Act. After that decision, the complaint says, the agency said it would prepare a national recovery plan by the end of 2025. Instead, Fish & Wildlife reversed course in November, the complaint says, concluding that a recovery plan would not benefit conservation because gray wolf listings are “no longer appropriate,” even though wolves remain federally protected across most of the Lower 48 states.
February 24, 2026 – Antitrust
Netflix Challenged on Proposed Acquisition of Warner Discovery Assets Including HBO Max
Three Netflix subscribers have filed a federal antitrust lawsuit seeking to block Netflix’s proposed acquisition of HBO Max and other Warner Bros. Discovery assets, alleging the deal would create a monopoly in the subscription video-on-demand (SVOD) market and lead to higher prices and reduced service quality.
The complaint, filed in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California, challenges Netflix’s plan to acquire HBO Max and Warner Bros. Discovery’s film and television studios. Plaintiffs argue that the merger would “entrench its [Netflix’s] market dominance” and establish a monopoly in the U.S. market for [SVOD], harming subscribers through “increased pricing and degraded service quality.”
HBO Max is “the most capable of all rival SVOD firms to challenge Netflix’s market dominance,” according to the complaint, and eliminating it as a direct competitor would trigger a “presumption of illegality and anti-competitive effect” under federal guidelines. The suit also claims that Netflix’s acquisition of Warner Bros. Discovery’s studios would allow it to withhold licensed content from competitors, further consolidating control. Netflix, the suit notes, already retains exclusive rights to its original programming branded “Only on Netflix.”
February 23, 2026 – Constitution
Interfaith Groups Sue Trump Over ‘Judeo-Christian’ Religious Panel
Five interfaith and minority religious organizations have filed a lawsuit challenging President Donald Trump’s Religious Liberty Commission, arguing that its overwhelmingly Christian makeup violates federal law governing advisory panels.
The suit, filed in U.S. District Court in Manhattan, alleges that the 14-member commission fails to represent America’s religious diversity despite its stated mission to “defend religious liberty for all Americans” and to celebrate “peaceful religious pluralism.” Thirteen members identify with Christian denominations, while the sole non-Christian member is an Orthodox Jewish rabbi, according to the complaint. No representatives of Islam, Hinduism, Sikhism, or interfaith organizations serve on the panel.
Plaintiffs contend that the commission violates the Federal Advisory Committee Act, which requires advisory bodies to be “fairly balanced” in the viewpoints they represent. “A body meant to advise on religious liberty and celebrate religious pluralism in this country cannot be fairly balanced within the meaning of FACA when all but one of its members represent Christian denominations,” the complaint states.
February 20, 2026 – Consumer Fraud
Verizon Wireless Accuses T-Mobile of False Advertising
Verizon Wireless has sued T-Mobile in Manhattan federal court, accusing its largest rival of false advertising and causing irreparable harm by promising consumers more than $1,000 of annual savings if they switch cellphone carriers.
T-Mobile exaggerated the alleged savings, sometimes by more than 100%, by comparing its promotional rates with Verizon’s standard rates, and inflating the value of streaming, satellite connectivity, and other benefits that “the other guys leave out,” according to the complaint.
In its lawsuit, Verizon also argues that T-Mobile doubled down on savings claims that were “substantially identical” to claims that the National Advertising Review Board, which oversees the U.S. system of advertising industry self-regulation, found unsubstantiated and misleading in 2025 and 2026. The deception, the complaint says, includes failing to offer apples-to-apples comparisons of subscriber costs by understating the savings Verizon offers when it bundles services, such as Netflix with HBO Max, or Hulu with Disney+ and ESPN+.
For Litigation Report 2026, Click Here
™
Editor: Robert S. Want
Services of WANT Publishing:
CaseFilingsAlert.com
(new cases filed in courts around the country)
Social Media Addiction
(addiction lawsuits with Meta, TikTok et al. on trial)
MDLCases.com
(intro to mass-tort multidistrict litigation
plus listing of pending cases)
Copyright-Litigation.com
(impact of artificial intelligence on copyright law)
Litigation Report 2026
(annual survey of notable litigation)
NationsCourts.com
(comprehensive guide to nation’s
federal, state and county courts)
LegalEditor.com
(editing and writing services)