Case Overview | Roundup | Five class action developments across insurance denials, defective vehicles, consumer products, biometric data collection, and personal injury investigations — published May 2026.

Class Action Roundup: Anthem Cancer Treatment Settlement, Mitsubishi Hood Defect, P&G Deodorant Lawsuit, and More

Several notable class action developments emerged in late May 2026, spanning a $3.6 million insurance settlement, a vehicle hood defect affecting 2022 Mitsubishi Outlander owners, a false advertising claim against Procter & Gamble, a biometric data lawsuit against Disneyland, and an ongoing investigation into nitrous oxide injuries. These cases represent a broad cross-section of consumer and patient rights litigation currently making its way through the courts.

Whether you purchased a specific deodorant, visited a Disneyland theme park, own a 2022 Mitsubishi Outlander, or had cancer treatment denied by Anthem, you may want to review the cases below to understand your potential options.

1. Anthem Health Insurance — Proton Beam Cancer Treatment Settlement

Settlement Amount: Approximately $3.6 million

Who Qualifies: Anthem policyholders whose claims for proton beam radiation therapy were denied

Status: Proposed settlement; court approval pending

Anthem has agreed to pay approximately $3.6 million to resolve a proposed class action lawsuit alleging the insurer improperly denied coverage for proton beam radiation therapy — a specialized cancer treatment. According to the complaint, Anthem applied overly restrictive medical necessity criteria that the lawsuit alleges did not align with accepted clinical standards for proton therapy, leaving cancer patients without access to a treatment their oncologists had recommended.

The lawsuit claims that policyholders suffered financial harm and, in some cases, were forced to forgo or delay treatment as a direct result of those denials. Anthem has not admitted wrongdoing as part of the proposed resolution.

Class members may be eligible to receive a portion of the settlement fund if they had proton beam therapy claims denied by Anthem within the applicable timeframe. Specific eligibility criteria and claim deadlines had not been fully published at the time of this writing.

How to claim: Monitor the settlement administrator's website for claim filing instructions once the court grants preliminary approval.

2. Mitsubishi Outlander Hood Defect — Class Action Settlement

Deadline: Check settlement site for current deadline

Estimated Payout: Varies by claim type

Who Qualifies: Current and former owners or lessees of certain 2022 Mitsubishi Outlander vehicles

A class action settlement has been reached on behalf of current and former owners and lessees of certain 2022 Mitsubishi Outlander vehicles, according to the settlement terms. The lawsuit alleged that the vehicles were equipped with defective hoods that do not function as intended — a claim Mitsubishi has not admitted to as part of the settlement.

According to the complaint, the alleged hood defect affected the safety and usability of the vehicle and was not adequately disclosed to consumers at the time of purchase or lease. Class members who qualify may be eligible for compensation or a repair remedy, depending on the specific terms finalized by the court.

Owners of affected 2022 Outlander models should review the settlement terms carefully to determine whether they fall within the defined class and what documentation, if any, may be required to file a valid claim.

How to claim: Visit the official settlement website to review eligibility criteria and submit a claim form before the posted deadline.

3. Procter & Gamble — Secret "Unscented" Deodorant Lawsuit

Deadline: Case is in early litigation; no settlement deadline yet

Estimated Payout: TBD

Who Qualifies: Consumers who purchased Secret Invisible Solid Antiperspirant/Deodorant marketed as "unscented"

A newly filed class action lawsuit alleges that Procter & Gamble falsely markets certain Secret Invisible Solid Antiperspirant and Deodorant products as "unscented" when the products allegedly contain fragrance ingredients. According to the complaint, the labeling is misleading to consumers — particularly those who seek fragrance-free products due to allergies, sensitivities, or personal preference.

The lawsuit claims that consumers paid a premium for a product they believed to be free of fragrance, and that had they known about the alleged presence of fragrance ingredients, they would not have purchased the product or would have paid less for it. P&G has not publicly responded to the allegations at the time of this reporting.

This case is in early stages, and no settlement has been reached. Consumers who purchased the identified Secret products may want to retain their receipts and monitor the case for future developments.

How to claim: No claim form is available at this stage. Follow the case for updates.

4. Disneyland — Facial Recognition Data Collection Lawsuit

Deadline: Case is in early litigation; no settlement deadline yet

Estimated Payout: TBD

Who Qualifies: Visitors to Disneyland theme parks whose biometric data may have been collected

A class action lawsuit alleges that The Walt Disney Company collects facial recognition data from visitors to its Disneyland theme parks without obtaining proper consent, according to the complaint. The filing claims that Disney's data collection practices may violate state biometric privacy laws, which in certain states require companies to obtain informed written consent before collecting, storing, or using a person's biometric identifiers.

The lawsuit states that visitors were not adequately informed that their facial recognition data was being captured, nor given a meaningful opportunity to opt out. Disney has not publicly commented on the allegations at the time of this reporting.

Cases involving biometric data collection have seen significant litigation activity in recent years, particularly under Illinois' Biometric Information Privacy Act (BIPA) and similar statutes. This case may have implications for park visitors in states with comparable protections.

How to claim: No claim form is available at this stage. Individuals who visited Disneyland and believe their biometric data may have been collected without consent may wish to monitor the case for developments.

5. Nitrous Oxide Injury Investigation — Ongoing

Deadline: Ongoing investigation; no settlement deadline

Estimated Payout: Varies by injury and circumstance

Who Qualifies: Individuals seriously injured — or surviving family members of those killed — due to nitrous oxide-related incidents, including impaired driving crashes

Attorneys are currently investigating claims on behalf of people who suffered serious injury or death connected to nitrous oxide, commonly referred to as whippets. According to the investigation summary, potential claims may involve individuals harmed through recreational misuse of the substance or people injured by drivers operating vehicles while impaired by nitrous oxide.

These cases differ from class actions — they would likely proceed as individual personal injury or wrongful death lawsuits depending on the specific circumstances. Potential damages, eligibility, and legal theories vary significantly by case and jurisdiction.

This is not a settlement announcement. Rather, it reflects an active legal investigation into whether affected individuals may have viable claims. Anyone who believes they may have been harmed in a nitrous oxide-related incident should consult a licensed attorney to understand their options.

How to claim: Contact a personal injury attorney to discuss the facts of your individual situation.

Key Takeaways

• The Anthem settlement is the most time-sensitive item in this roundup — if you had proton beam therapy denied by Anthem, monitoring the settlement approval process is important to preserve any potential claim.
• The Mitsubishi Outlander settlement has an active claim period — 2022 Outlander owners should verify whether their vehicle falls within the defined class before the deadline passes.
• Several cases here are in early litigation, meaning no compensation is available yet. Retaining proof of purchase for the P&G deodorant and documenting any Disneyland visits may be useful if these cases progress.
• Biometric privacy lawsuits are an emerging area of litigation — courts across the country are still working out the scope of consumer protections under state biometric laws.
• Not all nitrous oxide claims will qualify as lawsuits — eligibility depends heavily on individual circumstances, making attorney consultation especially important for those cases.

Have you filed a claim in any of these cases, or do you have a question about your eligibility? Share your experience in the comments below.

InjuryClaims.com reports on class action lawsuits and settlements. Nothing in this article constitutes legal advice. Eligibility for any settlement or lawsuit depends on individual circumstances and should be evaluated by a licensed attorney.