Earlier updates report the developments and projections at the time they were written. For current settlement terms and deadlines, see the latest updates above.
June 17, 2026 -Over 23,000 Total Cases
With trials approaching, the AFFF firefighting foam MDL remains highly active. By June 2026, more than 23,000 cases had been associated with the MDL over its history, a different measure from the number of actions pending at any given time.
This underscores the harm caused by these poisons. But it does make the claims harder to settle because more claims equals more complexity.
December 9, 2025 – 85 New Cases in November
With test trials approaching, the AFFF MDL saw continued growth. Eighty-five new cases were added in November, bringing the total to 15,334.
November 4, 2025 – MDL Case Count Update
October saw a significant influx of 1,307 new pending cases, one of the largest monthly increases in recent history. The total now stands at 15,249 cases.
October 2, 2025 – Dust Needs to Settle
The flood of AFFF lawsuits has prompted a pause to catch our breath. There are a lot more lawsuits than anyone predicted. We have no idea how many of these claims are viable and how many were to get in under a deadline.
September 3, 2025 – Litigation Explodes
Everyone on both sides of the AFFF litigation understood there was a backlog of claims waiting in the wings. What no one anticipated was the sheer scale of what would hit the docket in a single week.
In just seven days, 37,446 potential claims were reported, a stunning flood of litigation unleashed by the fast-approaching deadline set in Judge Gergel’s CMO 35. What was expected to be a wave has turned into a historic surge.
Will this expedite what we thought was nearly a done deal on the settlement? It will not. This makes resolution far more complicated. We have no idea how many of these cases are truly viable.
August 19, 2025: Our Lawyers Are Still Taking Cases
There is a huge rush to file cases before the September 5 deadline. At some point, probably at the end of the month, we will stop taking new AFFF cases. If you think you want to bring a claim, call a lawyer today. Preferably us, but definitely call someone today.
August 17, 2025: Trial Date Pushed Back
The first personal injury trial in the PFAS firefighting foam litigation has been put on hold as the court works to get its arms around a surge of unfiled claims. On August 15, Judge Richard Gergel issued Case Management Order No. 35, directing plaintiffs’ leadership to file every case involving one of the six designated injuries (kidney cancer, testicular cancer, ulcerative colitis, thyroid disease, liver cancer, and thyroid cancer) within 21 days. That order creates what the court calls a Filing Facilitation Window, which runs through September 5, 2025. Non-lead lawyers are encouraged to file during the same window, with the court temporarily allowing bundled complaints and short-form filings to expedite the process.
The order also lays out what proof must accompany each case. Plaintiffs will need to provide medical documentation of diagnosis, evidence of PFAS exposure through drinking water or occupational contact, and verification of residence or work history. All of that information must be submitted electronically through the court’s portal. Judge Gergel noted that the existence of thousands of unfiled claims risked derailing both the MDL’s structure and ongoing settlement discussions, and he ordered regular reports from both sides to monitor compliance.
Our view is that September 5 will likely serve as a practical cutoff for getting into this litigation. If you believe you or a client has a claim, now is the time to act. AFFF lawyers will need time to collect records and file before the window closes, and those who wait may find themselves shut out.
August 7, 2025: Group B Discovery Extension Granted
Judge Richard Gergel has approved a joint motion from both sides in the AFFF litigation, extending the deadline to August 4, 2025, for submitting a proposal on how to select additional plaintiffs for Tier 2 Group B discovery. This pause allows the parties more time to negotiate the structure for expanding the discovery pool under Case Management Order 26H.
So far, the court has already chosen three Tier 2 Group B plaintiffs, two involving ulcerative colitis and one with thyroid disease, and asked the parties to agree on how to proceed with further selections. Initially due June 27, 2025, that submission deadline has now been delayed. Discovery for this batch of cases is still set to conclude by September 12, 2025, unless another extension is granted.
July 20, 2025: Court Confronts Filing Flood Ahead of Bellwethers
Judge Richard Gergel issued a Case Management Order calling for an urgent conference to address what may be tens of thousands of unfiled AFFF claims. The court’s concern: if not managed, this backlog could destabilize the bellwether trial schedule and hinder global settlement discussions. Plaintiffs’ counsel have been ordered to provide detailed counts of both filed and unfiled claims and to identify firms managing over 100 unfiled cases.
Everyone has always known there were many unfiled cases.
July 2, 2025: Major Spike in AFFF Lawsuits as Settlement May Be Approaching
The AFFF firefighting foam MDL has seen a dramatic increase, now totaling 11,096 active lawsuits, a jump of 705 new cases in just the last month. This is one of the sharpest monthly rises in recent years for a mass tort that has been slowly building over the last seven years.
There is a rush to file cases. Quickly. Plaintiffs’ AFFF attorneys nationwide are actively filing cases to ensure their clients are included ahead of a potential global settlement. Law firms are moving quickly to beat any cutoff dates that may be imposed once settlement terms are finalized.
June 20, 2025: Science Day
Today is “Science Day” to educate the court on the scientific evidence linking AFFF exposure to liver and thyroid cancers. This non-adversarial session allowed both plaintiffs and defendants to present expert findings, which will influence future admissibility of scientific testimony in the litigation.
June 3, 2025: More and More AFFF Cancer Lawsuits
The AFFF multidistrict litigation (MDL No. 2873, before Judge Richard Gergel in the District of South Carolina) added 1,049 new active cases in May, growing from 9,342 to 10,391 total active lawsuits by June 1, 2025.
This surge confirms that there is a foot race now to file AFFF/PFAS lawsuits. Why? Because the worst-kept secret in this litigation right now is that these lawsuits are expected to settle soon.
May 30, 2025: Which Trial Goes First?
The battle now is which case should be tried first if the judge opts for a single-plaintiff trial this October. Plaintiffs’ lawyers say it should be one of these three cases:
- Donnelly
A strong candidate with minimal confounding factors. The only relevant considerations are gender and Class 1 obesity (BMI 32.7), neither of which meaningfully detracts from a straightforward causation argument. His younger age strengthens the argument that PFAS exposure was a more likely driver of his kidney cancer.
- Speers
Although the defense may raise a rare gene mutation (FH), no medical literature ties it directly to kidney cancer. The defense’s geographic objection, his exposure came via Ambler water rather than Horsham or Warminster, is undercut by ATSDR findings confirming elevated PFAS exposure in Ambler from nearby military sites, consistent with other impacted Pennsylvania communities.
- Voelker
Least favored by the PEC due to added noise. In addition to Class 2 obesity (BMI 36.9), Voelker has hypertension, a rare CHEK2 gene mutation (not definitively linked to kidney cancer), and potential collateral issues that risk distracting the jury. Proceeding with this case first would contradict the Court’s own guidance to eliminate unnecessary complications in early trials.
Plaintiffs are asking that we start with Donnelly if a single case is tried, reserving Speers and Voelker in descending order of clarity. The hope is to cleanly test general and specific causation, without giving defendants room to muddy the waters with unrelated risk factors.
May 14, 2025: 3M Agrees to $450 Million Settlement with New Jersey
3M has agreed to pay up to $450 million to the state of New Jersey to settle claims related to PFAS contamination from its Chambers Works facility. This settlement, reached just days before a scheduled trial, will fund environmental remediation efforts across the state. Despite the settlement, 3M denies any wrongdoing.
This $450 million PFAS settlement between 3M and the state of New Jersey is yet another indication that 3M does not want to face juries in this litigation. The fact that this deal was finalized just days before a scheduled trial shows that 3M remains willing to pay substantial amounts to prevent potentially damaging courtroom outcomes, even as it continues to deny liability.
May 2, 2025: MDL Grows By Over 400 Cases in April
Another 414 cases hit the AFFF MDL last month, pushing the total to 9,342. The sudden surge is no accident. Plaintiffs’ firms are racing to file ahead of any settlement framework taking shape. With talks rumored to be progressing behind closed doors, the recent filing spike suggests attorneys are making sure their clients are not left out when the settlement talks lead to a resolution.
April 11, 2025: Science Day Set for June 20
Judge Gergel has scheduled a Science Day in the AFFF MDL for June 20, 2025, immediately after the monthly status conference. The topic is the link between PFAS exposure and liver and thyroid cancer, two of the central injuries in these cases.
Each side gets four experts. No lawyers are allowed to argue or cross-examine. It is all off the record, and the court says it is just for informational purposes. But anyone who has been around MDLs knows this is more than just academic. Science Day is when each side lays the groundwork for how the judge views the science and ultimately, what kind of expert testimony will survive a Daubert challenge. We are not too worried about these cases being stricken in their entirety. The science is too strong. But there will be real battles about what comes in and what does not.
So, while it is not officially a battleground, it is absolutely a strategic one. For plaintiffs, it is a rare chance to frame the science in human terms. For defendants, it is about downplaying risk and complexity.
April 1, 2025: 498 More AFFF Lawsuits Filed in March as MDL Grows
March filings added 498 new cases to the AFFF MDL 2873, which now contains 8,928 total lawsuits. The increase reflects continued activity in personal injury claims involving kidney, testicular, and thyroid cancers, among others. The MDL remains in the expert discovery phase, with significant Daubert motion deadlines coming this summer and the first personal injury trial still scheduled for October 6.
March 30, 2025: The Plan Moving Forward
A new Case Management Order (CMO 33) clarifies and narrows the scope of personal injury and wrongful death claims in the MDL. This MDL officially is only pursuing six personal injury categories allegedly linked to PFAS exposure from AFFF:
- Kidney cancer
- Testicular cancer
- Ulcerative colitis
- Thyroid disease
- Liver cancer
- Thyroid cancer
Previously, plaintiffs had raised over 200 different injury claims in the MDL, but most of those have now been dismissed.
The order also sets out a clear pretrial schedule for the two newest conditions added, liver cancer and thyroid cancer, which will now proceed alongside the other four bellwether categories. The Court also rescheduled Science Day on these two cancers to June 20, 2025.
The expert discovery timeline is as follows:
| Event |
Deadline |
| Plaintiffs’ general causation expert reports due |
July 11, 2025 |
| Defendants’ reports due |
August 22, 2025 |
| Plaintiffs’ rebuttal reports due |
September 5, 2025 |
| Meet-and-confer on Daubert briefing schedule by |
August 22, 2025 |
| Submission of proposed or competing Daubert orders due |
September 12, 2025 |
All expert discovery will be subject to Rule 26 limitations, including protection of draft reports and communications with consulting experts.
What This Means for Plaintiffs and Lawyers
CMO 33 is a strategic inflection point. It is time to draw hard lines to streamline this sprawling MDL, focusing only on the six injuries that currently have scientific support and can be developed through coordinated expert discovery. If your client’s injury falls outside that list, it is not being actively advanced by the PEC, and any effort to litigate it will require strict adherence to the more burdensome process in CMO 28, including submission of expert causation reports on an individual basis.
For lawyers representing clients with claims related to high cholesterol, hypertension, prostate cancer, or any of the previously alleged 200+ injuries, this order means one thing: those claims will not move forward as part of the coordinated proceedings unless you take affirmative steps under CMO 28, and even then, success is uncertain without medical and scientific support. That will be a steep climb.
This order also signals the Court’s growing emphasis on scientific rigor and trial readiness. The fact that Science Day was postponed but not canceled, and that hard deadlines for expert reports were set, suggests the Court is preparing for Rule 702 challenges (Daubert motions) and the inevitable narrowing of viable claims before trials begin.
In sum, CMO 33 pushes this litigation into a more focused, science-driven phase. Plaintiffs with claims tied to one of the six core injuries should prepare to comply with upcoming discovery and expert disclosure deadlines. Those with other injuries must evaluate whether they have the evidentiary support to justify continued pursuit under the MDL’s strict procedural guardrails.
January 23, 2025: New Indiana AFFF Lawsuit
In a new lawsuit filed on January 13, 2025, a firefighter from Columbus, Indiana, alleges severe injuries caused by exposure to toxic chemicals in firefighting foam and protective gear during a nearly 30-year career.
The lawsuit, filed directly in the MDL class action, targets multiple manufacturers of AFFF and firefighting equipment, accusing them of knowingly producing and distributing products containing harmful per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances.
The plaintiff developed non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma after extensive exposure to AFFF during training exercises and emergency responses, as well as through prolonged contact with firefighting gear treated with PFAS. The lawsuit asserts that manufacturers were aware (which could lead to punitive damages) of PFAS’s toxic and carcinogenic properties but failed to do the right and legal thing and warn users, offer safer alternatives, or recall existing stockpiles of this poison.
The complaint includes claims of negligence, gross negligence, failure to warn, defective design, and fraudulent concealment. The plaintiff seeks compensatory and punitive damages for physical injuries, emotional distress, and ongoing medical needs.
January 20, 2025: Firefighter Cancer Lawsuit Focus Intensifies in AFFF MDL
The AFFF class action lawsuit continues to gain traction as firefighter cancer lawsuits take center stage. Many cases in the multidistrict litigation involve claims of non-Hodgkin lymphoma, kidney cancer, and thyroid disease linked to exposure to PFAS chemicals in firefighting foam.
The MDL now, finally, is starting to emphasize personal injury and wrongful death lawsuits, with a still-increasing number of plaintiffs alleging their cancer was caused by prolonged exposure during their careers.
December 31, 2024: Ulcerative Colitis Cases Set for Discovery
Attorneys representing defendants and plaintiffs have jointly requested a new Case Management Order to establish a bellwether discovery pool for fire foam lawsuit personal injury cases involving primary injuries of ulcerative colitis. Several ulcerative colitis cases have already undergone Tier 1 discovery, and a smaller group of up to four of these cases will now be chosen for more comprehensive Tier 2 discovery.
December 23, 2024: Are AFFF Firefighter Cancer Lawsuit Settlements Around the Corner?
Settlement speculation is intensifying, and our guess is that we are six or eight months away from a settlement. There is talk of average per person settlements for plaintiffs with cancer diagnoses of $400,000 to $500,000. Do we think it will be that high? For a global settlement, probably not, honestly.
October 22, 2024: New Case Management Order for Personal Injury Cases
The MDL judge issued a significant new Case Management Order aimed at gaining more detailed information about the scope of the litigation and the “factual issues relevant to addressing the personal injury claims in this MDL.” The Order creates a new and additional fact screening process by which claimants will be required to present a “threshold showing of evidence” to support their injury claims.
The order essentially requires each personal injury plaintiff to provide an updated and more detailed version of their Plaintiff Profile Form and submit medical records required by Question II.E of that form. This is a significant procedural order and it marks one of the first indications that the focus of this MDL is really shifting to the firefighter personal injury lawsuits.
September 19, 2024: New Lawsuit Filed by Maryland Firefighter
A Maryland man has filed a new lawsuit in the District of South Carolina against 3M Company, AGC Chemicals Americas, Inc., and other major corporations.
The plaintiff, a former firefighter and U.S. Navy veteran, alleges that he developed thyroid cancer due to exposure to toxic PFAS found in firefighting foam and turnout gear manufactured and distributed by the defendants.
July 17, 2024: Plaintiffs’ AFFF Lawyers Submit Letter To Judge Gergel Seeking To Streamline Cases
Plaintiffs’ AFFF lawyers seek to streamline these cases to reduce complications and expenses. They recently submitted a letter/brief to Judge Richard M. Gergel of the U.S. District Court for the District of South Carolina, which is handling a large-scale multidistrict litigation involving PFAS pollution from fire suppressants.
The letter proposes that bellwether cases for kidney and testicular cancers come from Pennsylvania, where the contamination is linked to former Naval Air bases near Philadelphia. For thyroid disease and ulcerative colitis cases, AFFF attorneys for victims suggest selecting individuals from Colorado, where contamination is associated with Peterson Air Force Base and Colorado Springs Municipal Airport. This approach aims to simplify the process by focusing on specific sites, thereby easing the burden on the court and parties involved.
The proposal emphasizes that selecting all Group A Tier 2 cases (kidney and testicular cancers) from Pennsylvania and all Group B Tier 2 cases (thyroid disease and ulcerative colitis) from Colorado will significantly reduce the discovery burden. It will also get more AFFF lawsuits to trial faster, which is the goal. It will also support the possibility of multi-plaintiff trials by ensuring common factual and legal issues, simplifying jury instructions, and reducing the risk of jury confusion.
AFFF lawyers highlight the procedural and factual background, noting that extensive Tier 1 discovery has already been completed. The aim here is to accurately represent the overall docket (as long as they are great cases, to be honest), ensuring the bellwether trials produce verdicts that reflect the range of cases in the litigation.
July 10, 2024: AFFF Litigation Clarifications
Let’s make sure everyone understands how this litigation works. Our lawyers represent plaintiffs injured by AFFF, as well as firefighters and others exposed to this chemical. But, unfortunately, this litigation is combined with state and local governments who are litigating to recover extensive costs incurred due to PFAS contamination affecting natural resources, public health, and infrastructure.
For instance, Wisconsin’s 2024-25 budget includes requests for additional staff to develop and implement PFAS-related regulations and standards, reflecting the state’s proactive approach to managing PFAS contamination. Similarly, New York has engaged in significant administrative enforcement, overseeing large-scale cleanup efforts and entering consent orders with site operators, such as Westchester County Airport, to remediate contaminated soils and groundwater. Rhode Island is working on agreements with public water systems to ensure compliance with state PFAS standards, demonstrating the state’s commitment to addressing PFAS pollution.
These legal actions are grounded in claims under consumer protection laws and environmental statutes and demands for civil penalties, restitution, and public nuisance abatement. The lawsuits aim to secure funding for ongoing and future remediation efforts and public health initiatives.
These are important lawsuits. There is no question. It is just unfortunate that they are in the same litigation as individual injury cases because the government water contamination lawsuits suck too much of the energy out of the court.
May 30, 2024: CMO No. 30 Establishes Protocol For Dismissing AFFF Personal Injury Claims
In Case Management Order No. 30, the court establishes a detailed protocol for dismissing personal injury claims that did not make the cut in the AFFF class action lawsuit.
For dismissing entire cases, AFFF attorneys must file a notice of voluntary dismissal for member cases on the lead MDL docket and ensure the filing is spread to the respective member cases. Each notice can list up to 25 member cases and must indicate that dismissals are pursuant to Paragraph 6 of Second Amended CMO 28. Additionally, an extra document listing the cases to be dismissed must be submitted to the Clerk’s office in a specific format.
For plaintiffs who wish to continue pursuing claims outside of the MDL, the Second Amended Case Management Order, issued two weeks ago, provides a path. If the dismissals are done properly, a tolling agreement will be in place. Most firefighting foam lawyers will hold these cases and see how the science plays out because the epidemiology of some of these diseases is still in its infancy.
May 28, 2024: Our Firm Narrows Qualifying Diagnoses
Our firm is now focusing on new cases involving six diseases:
- Ulcerative colitis
- Liver cancer
- Kidney cancer
- Testicular cancer
- Thyroid disease/hypothyroidism
- Thyroid cancer
This is a significant narrowing of the playing field for us, likely leaving out some very deserving cases. So why do it? Because this is litigation, we have to follow the science that is now, not where it might be going.
January 26, 2024: The Effort to Narrow the Litigation
In our January 2nd update below, we discussed an effort to remove some of these water contamination defendants from this MDL, which we welcome because it would allow greater focus on the AFFF firefighting foam lawsuits. These two pieces of litigation should have never been combined in the first place.
Of course, the defendants object. The defense outlines several reasons for denying the request. First, they mention that outcomes of ongoing settlements with other parties could affect the Sovereigns’ claims. Second, there are already two bellwether processes in progress and a third being developed, which should be prioritized since they involve many cases affecting many people. Third, the Sovereigns are involved in regulatory proceedings and are receiving federal funding for PFAS issues, which could change the nature of their claims. Fourth, the proposed bellwether process is deemed unfair and unworkable, as it selects only a few Sovereigns based on unclear criteria.
Could all of these problems be overcome with a little creative effort? Absolutely.
January 10, 2024: New AFFF Case
A new AFFF lawsuit was filed in Alabama this week. The plaintiff alleges, like every PFAS lawsuit, that he was exposed to per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), including PFOS and PFOA. The plaintiff asserts that exposure to these substances led to the development of testicular cancer. This exposure is claimed to have occurred through contaminated drinking water and environmental pollution in the area where the plaintiff lived.
The plaintiff’s PFAS lawyers filed this lawsuit in state court. 3M has removed the case to federal court, which sends it to the AFFF MDL.
December 12, 2023: Motion to Formalize Bellwether Discovery Pool
Attorneys in the AFFF case have collectively filed a motion to formalize the Initial Personal Injury Bellwether Discovery Pool. The pool comprises twenty-five plaintiffs, including eight with claims of hypothyroidism/thyroid disease, eight alleging testicular cancer, four asserting cases of ulcerative colitis, and five individuals claiming kidney cancer.
This step is integral to the bellwether discovery process, which is designed to expedite the movement towards AFFF-related personal injury and wrongful death trials. Additionally, the involved parties have agreed to waive their Lexecon rights, as previously explained, but this waiver is specifically for the selected cases and applies only to the individual plaintiffs designated as Personal Injury Tier One Plaintiffs.
December 6, 2023: MDL Judge Takes Stock of Cancer Cases
Judge Gergel has mandated a series of tasks to be completed within 60 days to better understand where the firefighting foam lawsuits are going. These tasks include compiling a list of all plaintiff cases that claim illnesses other than the four already specified, submitting relevant peer-reviewed scientific studies about the association with other diseases, and organizing a ‘science day.’ A ‘science day’ is an event where experts gather to discuss and debate the scientific evidence regarding the alleged connections between various diseases and exposure to AFFF-contaminated water. None of the evidence presented in a science day is binding. But it gives the court a comprehensive understanding of the scientific perspectives on the issue.
November 1, 2023: Bellwether Candidate Cases to Be Selected
A list of the AFFF personal injury plaintiffs who will be included in the pool of potential bellwether trial cases is due to be submitted by the end of this month. This group of personal injury plaintiffs will then go through a short fact-discovery process to learn more about their cases. After that is completed, the parties will select a few cases for the initial round of bellwether trials, which could happen late next year.
October 24, 2023: New Study on PFAS and Thyroid Cancer
People who have higher levels of a specific type of PFAS, known as linear perfluorooctanesulfonic acid (PFOS), are more likely to develop thyroid cancer, according to a recent study set to be published in eBioMedicine, a Lancet journal. The study revealed that the risk of thyroid cancer increased by 56% in individuals with higher concentrations of linear PFOS.
September 18, 2023: Bellwether Trial Cases Named
Judge Gergel let the parties know last week that four water utility lawsuits from towns in California, New Jersey, New York, and South Dakota will form the pool for upcoming bellwether cases. Claims against 3M, DuPont, and Chemours are on hold as the settlement with those defendants goes through the approval process. But companies such as Tyco and Chemguard have not settled, and plaintiff lawyers will now lock in on those cases.
What about the AFFF personal injury and wrongful death lawsuits? We should have, hopefully this month, a bellwether trial schedule for those cases. If you want defendants to make reasonable AFFF foam settlement offers, you need to have trial dates to apply pressure. So a bellwether trial schedule will be a huge step toward settlement. AFFF attorneys have been debating the range of cancers that should be covered in the bellwethers.
These trials will be incredibly important because bellwether trials serve as a barometer, providing insight into potential outcomes for similar cases, which in turn helps inform and potentially streamline settlement negotiations.
September 14, 2023: Bellwether Schedule in Telomer AFFF Cases
Yesterday, the Judge in the AFFF class action entered a new Case Management Order setting a schedule for a new round of bellwether trials involving Telomer water contamination cases. These cases were not included in the recent water provider settlement because Telomer-based firefighting foam is chemically different than other types of AFFF. The defendants claim that Telomer AFFF does not contain the harmful PFAS. The new CMO set a presumptive trial date for the first Telomer AFFF bellwether trial for August 23, 2024. What remains unclear is how this might impact the bellwether trial schedule in the individual AFFF occupational exposure cases.
August 21, 2023: Testicular Cancer
The latest AFFF lawsuit update is a new study in Environmental Health Perspectives underscores that testicular cancer is a potential risk of AFFF exposure. There is no question the testicular cancer claims are strong.
August 16, 2023: Insurance Coverage Battle
Four insurance companies have asked that Tyco’s insurance coverage claims be dismissed for the MDL class action. Tyco is contesting the dismissal, claiming its fight for insurance coverage for AFFF lawsuits should be fought in the MDL. Tyco insists the MDL is the correct and most appropriate place to litigate these claims.
Ironically, we are rooting for Tyco on this one. More insurance coverage will facilitate AFFF settlements.
July 17, 2023: Highest Monthly Volume for MDL
Nearly 500 new AFFF firefighting foam cases were transferred into the class action MDL over the last 30 days. That is the highest monthly volume of new cases since the MDL began over five years ago. There is no way to determine how many of these new cases are water contamination cases filed by local governments versus cancer cases filed by individuals with occupational exposure. There are now 5,227 pending cases in the MDL, but the recent settlement of the water contamination cases will eventually reduce that number.
July 1, 2023: MDL Continues to Grow
Over the last month, two hundred ninety-eight more cases were added to the AFFF firefighting foam class action MDL. The total number of cases in the MDL is now 4,793. It was recently announced, however, that the defendants have reached a global settlement arrangement to resolve all of the water contamination cases, so a large chunk of these pending cases will be getting dismissed eventually.
The good news is that moving on from the municipality claims, at least most of the lawsuits, will facilitate settlements for individual military and firefighter claims for many reasons. First, the settlement amounts seem smaller after throwing billions of dollars around. But these defendants also want to get these claims off their books, and more individual AFFF settlements will do that.
June 2, 2023: DuPont and Others Settle Some Water Contamination Claims
The Chemours Company, DuPont de Nemours, and Corteva have agreed in principle to resolve all PFAS-related drinking water claims from a defined class of public water systems catering to most of the U.S. population. The companies will set up a settlement fund worth $1.185 billion, with Chemours contributing 50% and DuPont and Corteva splitting the remaining half. The settlement, awaiting final approval from the District Court for the District of South Carolina, excludes specific water systems.
Rumor has it this is just the beginning, and a $10 billion-plus settlement with 3M is also in the works. This would be the best thing to happen to victims bringing individual AFFF cancer lawsuits if we can clear out the drinking water lawsuits from the MDL.
May 23, 2023: EPA Limits for PFAS Allowed Into Evidence
The Environmental Protection Agency’s proposed drinking water standards for PFOA and PFOS, two types of PFAS, have been allowed as evidence in the first AFFF lawsuit heading for trial.
The defendants argued against including the EPA’s proposed limits, claiming they could change before being finalized and do not reflect the knowledge at the time of manufacture.
The judge denied their motion, allowing the evidence as it sheds light on the toxicity of PFAS and supports the plaintiff’s damages claim on removing PFAS from its water supplies. You can expect the defendants to appeal on this issue if there is a significant verdict in this first bellwether AFFF trial. But this information does provide important context for the jury, and an appeal on this evidentiary issue is unlikely to be successful.
May 16, 2023: Bellwether Pool for Firefighter Cases
Phase 1 of the bellwether trials in the MDL will feature three water provider cases (the first being the City of Stuart). Phase 2, however, will feature three personal injury cases. The AFFF MDL class action judge instructed the parties to identify a second bellwether pool. This pool will focus on injury claims asserting that the toxic firefighting foam contaminated drinking water in certain areas. The parties must select the cases by July 28, 2023, and present a joint list of selected or proposed cases to the court by August 11, 2023.
The judge wants to select 28 personal injury claims for the second bellwether pool from plaintiffs who argue they were exposed to AFFF through contaminated drinking water instead of direct contact. The cases will comprise eight claims each of kidney cancer, testicular cancer, and thyroid disease, along with four claims of ulcerative colitis.
The pool will only include victims alleging exposure to polluted water near Peterson Air Force Base, Colorado Springs Municipal Airport, Willow Grove Naval Air Station Joint Reserve Base, and the Naval Air Warfare Center in Warminster.
May 12, 2023: Preview of Pivotal First Bellwether Trial
In the latest MDL 2873 update, the highly anticipated first bellwether trial in the PFAS/firefighting foam class action MDL will be in the municipal water contamination case of the City of Stuart v. 3M Co., et al. Stuart is a mid-sized beach town on Florida’s Atlantic coast, about 20 miles north of West Palm Beach.
The Stuart City Water Authority brought the lawsuit against a large group of companies that manufactured AFFF firefighting foam containing PFAS. The City claims that PFAS heavily contaminated its municipal water supply from these AFFF products. The defendants, however, insist that there is no credible evidence to prove that the PFAS that contaminated Stuart’s water supply came from their products. The City is seeking damages to compensate for the millions it spent to alleviate the contamination.
The outcome of this initial trial is expected to have a massive impact on the future of this litigation. For more info about the City of Stuart case, see our in-depth case summary: Pivotal First AFFF Bellwether Trial.
May 9, 2023: Defense Motion for Summary Judgment Denied
3M Co., E.I. du Pont de Nemours & Co., and Tyco Fire Products LP tried to get out of the upcoming bellwether AFFF trial. No dice. These and other companies could not evade a Florida city’s allegations of damages resulting from PFAS contamination in its waterways.
Federal Judge Richard Mark Gergel shot down their joint Motion for Summary Judgment, allowing the City of Stuart’s bid for compensation for the damages associated with AFFF in its treatment system operation and maintenance to proceed. In his Order and Memorandum Opinion, the judge ruled that this Florida city is not bringing speculative claims, and a jury should decide if there should be compensation and what that compensation should be. However, the defendants won summary judgment on the city’s private nuisance complaint.
May 2, 2023: New Study on PFAS in Firefighting Gear
The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) studied PFAS in firefighters’ gear, testing 20 textiles used to manufacture the gear.
The results, published yesterday, revealed the presence of between one and 17 PFAS in each textile, with higher concentrations found in the outer layers. This information will help companies produce safer gear and contribute to understanding if PFAS from the gear enters firefighters’ bodies, increasing their risk of cancer.
The study aims to provide answers to firefighters and their families and gather information for improving personal protective equipment. Firefighters across the US have filed lawsuits against manufacturers of PFAS and firefighter gear, alleging the chemicals have caused or increased the risk of cancer and other diseases.
March 7, 2023: New AFFF Lawsuit
A new AFFF firefighter lawsuit was filed this week. The plaintiffs in Keelan v. 3M are a husband and wife from Denver, Colorado. The 72-year-old plaintiff was exposed to fluorochemical products while working as a firefighter in Denver. He was diagnosed with prostate cancer, leading to personal injuries, pain, and emotional distress. Sheila Keelan is James Keelan’s spouse, and as a result of her husband’s exposure, she suffered and will continue to suffer the loss of consortium, society, affection, assistance, and conjugal fellowship, affecting their marital relationship.
The plaintiffs are filing this firefighter foam lawsuit in compliance with Case Management Order No. 3, designating the United States District of Colorado as the “home venue” where they would have filed the suit. The events giving rise to the claim occurred in Colorado. Their lawyers request that the case be immediately transferred to federal court in Colorado, a request that is unlikely to be granted.
January 12, 2023: AFFF Risks to Firefighters: A New Study
According to a new study in the journal Occupational Medicine, the cancer death rate among firefighters is 60% higher than in the general population. The study found that the mortality rates among firefighters for certain types of cancer were even higher.
For example, the prostate cancer mortality rate was 400% higher, and the rate for leukemia was 300% higher compared to non-firefighters. The study reports elevated cancer mortality among firefighters, although these figures alone cannot establish that AFFF caused those deaths.
January 3, 2023: Motions in First AFFF Lawsuit to Go to Trial
The first bellwether trial in the AFFF class action MDL will be in May 2023 in the case of the City of Stuart v. 3M Co., et al..
Last month, three defendants filed summary judgment motions in that case, hoping to avoid trial. Chemguard, Inc., BASF, and Tyco filed virtually identical motions arguing that they should be dismissed based on a lack of evidence showing that their specific AFFF products were a source of water contamination in Stuart, Florida. The motions point to a lack of testimony by the plaintiffs’ fact or expert witnesses linking the defendants’ products to the water.
December 23, 2022: 100 More Firefighting Foam Lawsuits Added to Class Action
Over the last 30 days, 100 new AFFF firefighting foam lawsuits were added to the class action MDL, bringing the total number of pending cases in the AFFF class action up to 3,399.
The first bellwether trial is still set for June 2023, but it is in a municipal water contamination case, not a personal injury case.
November 17, 2022: AFFF Lawsuit Update: Small Growth in Class Action
The AFFF class action MDL grew steadily over the last month. The MDL added 111 new cases over the previous month. This brings the total of pending AFFF lawsuits to 3,299.
For context, 2,100 firefighting foam lawsuits were pending the MDL at the beginning of the year. This means AFFF has been one of the fastest-growing mass torts in 2022.
These cases are a mix of individual personal injury cases brought by former firefighters and veterans with cancer and municipal water contamination lawsuits brought by local water authorities. So far, most of the attention in this class action has been focused on municipal water contamination cases.
November 4, 2022 AFFF Lawsuit Update: AFFF Settlement Efforts
The AFFF class action lawsuit judge has recently appointed a mediator to work with the parties in a series of settlement mediation sessions. These settlement talks will occur before the first bellwether test trial is set for next year.
Layn Phillips, a retired judge, will serve as the mediator. Phillips faces a difficult task since the AFFF class action MDL involves both claims by firefighters alleging that AFFF products caused their cancer and also claims by municipalities claiming that AFFF contaminated their water systems.
A global AFFF settlement will be complex because of the diverse defendants and plaintiffs. But the defendants may be eager to offer settlement compensation to plaintiffs in hopes of resolving some of the AFFF lawsuits.
The first bellwether trial is set for June 2023.
September 24, 2022 AFFF Lawsuit Update: 3M’s Big Defense Rejected by Class Action Judge
In a huge win, the firefighting foam class action judge has rejected 3M’s government contractor defense. 3M had filed a motion for summary judgment, arguing that it should be immune from liability for injuries related to its firefighting foam products based on the application of the “government contractor” defense.
The MDL Judge held that the defense was not applicable because there was evidence that 3M was aware of some potential hazards associated with its AFFF products, but failed to warn the government about them.
This is a major win for AFFF victims because the summary judgment motion would have eliminated many of the claims in the firefighting foam class action lawsuit. 3M made a similar government contractor argument in the earplugs litigation with the same result.
September 13, 2022: Fire Foam Lawsuit Trial Date Selected
In the new Case Management Order issued on Monday, the judge in the AFFF firefighting foam multidistrict litigation indicated that the first bellwether test trial case would be selected in December 2022. So it is progress, albeit slow progress. The Order also advised that once the first bellwether case was selected, the trial will be set for April 2023. Our lawyers’ experience is that trial dates drive settlement talks. An even bigger driver for getting reasonable settlement amounts is getting a favorable outcome in the opening bellwether trial. That would be a considerable step toward negotiating a global settlement deal.
August 10, 2022: Firefighting Foam Class Action Update
From June 15, 2022, to July 15, 2022, 115 new AFFF firefighting foam lawsuits were transferred into the AFFF class action lawsuit. This brings the number of active AFFF lawsuits in the MDL to 2,700. Many of the newly filed AFFF cases are brought by plaintiffs who lived on or near military bases where firefighting foam was used. These plaintiffs claim that the use of AFFF caused PFAS to contaminate the water supply, causing them to suffer adverse health consequences.
July 6, 2022 Update: New Study on Harm of Firefighting Foam
A new study in the medical journal Hypertension underscores the breadth of the harm these chemicals can cause. The authors of this study found a 42% to 47% increased risk of hypertension in women exposed to PFAS.
This study provides more evidence of PFAS chemicals’ link to cardiovascular disease risk. The participant in this study with the highest PFAS concentration in their system had a 71% increased chance of hypertension. This study was done on 1,058 women, 470 of whom were diagnosed with hypertension between 1999 and 2017.
June 16, 2022: AFFF Lawsuit Update
Ninety-two new firefighting foam lawsuits have been transferred into the AFFF class action MDL in the last month, bringing the total number of pending AFFF lawsuits up to 2,586. A little over half of these new were filed by individuals claiming that their exposure to firefighting foam caused them to develop cancer. The remainder of the new cases were brought by local municipalities for alleged contamination of the local water supply.
June 7, 2022: Motion to Compel AFFF Documents
The AFFF class action lawsuit plaintiffs are asking the court to compel defendants DuPont and Chemours Co. to produce thousands of documents that have been withheld on privilege grounds.
The nearly 40,000 documents at issue include internal communications and correspondence between DuPont and Chemours relating to the controversial corporate spin-off by which DuPont created Chemours. The defendants have claimed attorney-client privilege and common interest to shield these communications from discovery.
In their motion, however, the plaintiffs assert that there was no “common interest” between the two companies because DuPont and Chemours were counterparties with adverse interests in the spin-off. The plaintiffs also contend that the spin-off was a fraudulent transfer (by which DuPont dumped off liabilities) and, therefore, the crime-fraud exception prohibits using privilege protection.
Just last week, the defendants filed their response in opposition to the motion to compel, and the matter will likely be decided before the end of this summer.
May 6, 2022: New Study on Risks of Firefighting Foam:
A new study published this week by researchers from the Maine Medical Center Research Institute found that PFAS, the toxic “forever chemicals” found in AFFF firefighting foam, pose a previously unknown health risk. The study found that exposure to PFAS can cause reduced bone mineral density in adolescent boys, leading to bone fractures and a host of other orthopedic problems. The study is further evidence of the dangers of PFAS and firefighting foam.
April 14, 2022: Government Contractor Defense
One bottleneck in the AFFF lawsuit is the briefing protocol for the government contractor defense being asserted by numerous defendants. The defense, which has already flopped for 3M in the earplug litigation, is being asserted by so many defendants that it is hard for the firefighting foam MDL judge to hear from everyone separately. So both sides have submitted proposals for handling briefs on the issue. The court’s expressed goal was to receive a “single omnibus brief” on the issue, but neither of the proposals submitted so far come close to that goal. These are just the typical complications of MDL class action litigation.
[Update: This defense is ultimately rejected by the court. See above.]
March 17, 2022: AFFF Lawsuit Medical Evidence Update
On March 3, 2022, the Plaintiffs’ Scientific Committee submitted a letter to the judge in the AFFF MDL, attaching two documents that they identify as “significant new scientific” evidence of the link between the chemicals in AFFF and cancer. The first was a notice from the California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) identifying the chemical in AFFF as a known carcinogen.
The second document was a draft EPA finding that similarly identifies PFOA as a “likely” human carcinogen. Although defense counsel submitted their letter on March 15 disputing the significance of both documents, the link between PFOA and cancer is gaining momentum.
February 9, 2022: AFFF Lawsuit Update
The defense attorneys have filed a motion for partial summary judgment in an AFFF class action lawsuit based on a government contractor immunity argument. Our lawyers expect a ruling on that motion sometime near the end of March. Meanwhile, the next status conference is set for February 25.
January 19, 2022: AFFF Litigation Growth Update
There are now nearly 2,034 plaintiffs in the MDL class action lawsuit that houses all federal court cases in South Carolina.
December 17, 2021: AFFF Lawsuit Discovery Update
The recently amended schedule for preparatory discovery in the opening round of bellwether trials in the MDL AFFF class action lawsuit is set to begin in January 2023.
Under the new schedule, fact discovery in the pool of bellwether candidate firefighting foam lawsuits must be completed by February 21, 2022. The parties will have until June 30, 2022, to complete expert discovery in these cases. The new deadline for pretrial Daubert challenges and motions for summary judgment is July 18, 2022.
Products Liability
