Our lawyers represent victims who want to file an AFFF lawsuit in all 50 states.
Chemicals in aqueous film-forming foam (AFFF) or “firefighting foam” may cause various types of cancer. If you were a firefighter or regularly exposed to AFFF and recently diagnosed with cancer, or you were exposed to PFAS through contaminated water, you may be able to file a lawsuit and get financial compensation.
In 2025, there are over 10,000 AFFF plaintiffs in the MDL lawsuit. So, a single judge will handle all AFFF firefighting foam cancer lawsuits in federal court. The hope is that this is the first step towards a global firefighting foam settlement. Take this with the caveat that there have been false starts on settlement in this litigation. But many lawyers, including us, expect a settlement soon.
The first personal injury bellwether trial is tentatively scheduled for October 20, 2025, with a focus exclusively on the kidney cancer claim, which our lawyer believes is among the strongest claims.
AFFF Lawsuit News
Our AFFF lawyers are dedicated to keeping you informed about the latest lawsuit updates in MDL 2873. Our attorneys will include the latest status developments and updates in our MDL AFFF class action in 2025. This is the year our lawyers hope and think will finally result in a favorable global settlement for victims.
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 (and we think settlement is close)
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.
If you have a case, call a lawyer today. We are at 800-553-8082.
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.
If you believe you have been harmed by exposure to AFFF or PFAS chemicals, time may be running out to act. Filing a claim now could secure your eligibility to participate in any forthcoming settlement. To protect your rights, call 800-553-8082 or request a free case evaluation today.
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.
Firefighting Foam Linked to Cancer
AFFF (firefighting foam) is a particular foam substance used for decades to put out petroleum-based fires. AFFF contains polyfluoroalkyl materials, which are known as “PFAS.”
PFAS are chemical compounds containing fluorine and carbon. PFAS chemicals are heat-resistant and very effective at extinguishing class b fires fueled by accelerants such as gasoline, cooking oils, paint, and kerosene or other petroleum products.
Unfortunately, PFAS do not biodegrade, and these chemicals will bind to proteins and accumulate in the bodies of humans and animals who are exposed to them. They can remain in the body for long periods. Sadly, the same durability that makes PFAS so valuable is what makes them “forever chemicals” that put exposed victims at risk. The built-to-last chemicals do not naturally break down. So they just stay in the victim’s body, increasing the risk of cancer, changes in liver enzymes, and other maladies.
PFAS have long been known to be a potential environmental contaminant. AFFF can get into drinking water and cause PFAS contamination.
Recently, however, PFAS chemicals in firefighting foam have been linked to certain types of cancer due to exposure.
In 2016, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) released a health advisory report warning that laboratory animal studies confirmed that exposure to PFAS can cause kidney and testicular cancer along with other adverse health effects.
Soon after, the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) performed several studies on PFAS and concluded that individuals regularly exposed to PFAS chemicals have an increased risk of developing kidney, prostate, and testicular cancer.
The American Cancer Society (ACS) and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) have reached the same finding and identified PFAS in firefighting foam as a human carcinogen.
Cancers Caused By AFFF Firefighting Foam
Any of the following cancers might be linked to AFFF firefighting foam:
- Pancreatic cancer
- Kidney cancer
- Breast cancer
- Liver cancer
- Leukemia
- Bladder cancer
- Ovarian cancer
- Non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma
- Testicular cancer
- Prostate cancer
Which of these cancers are the most common from firefighting foam? The literature suggests thyroid, kidney, bladder, testicular, prostate, and colon cancer. But exposed victims are likely at risk for cancer that go well beyond this list.
Our law firm is now drilling down on six conditions to qualify with us:
- Kidney cancer
- Testicular cancer
- Liver cancer
- Thyroid cancer
- Thyroid disease/hypothyroidism
- Ulcerative colitis
Who Are the AFFF Defendants?
The defendants facing itigation for their involvement in the manufacture and sale of fluorochemicals and products containing them include:
- DuPont
- 3M
- BASF Corporation
- Chemours
- Corteva
- Arkema
- AGC Chemicals Americas
- Dynax Corporation
- Kidde-Fenwal Inc.
- Clariant Corporation
- UTC Fire & Security Americas Corporation
- ChemDesign Products Inc.
These companies are all accused of manufacturing and selling AFFF, a firefighting foam agent, that contained PFOA and caused harm to individuals and the environment.
Firefighting Foam Lawsuits Are Being Filed
Many different companies have manufactured firefighting foam containing harmful PFAS over the years. The two biggest makers of AFFF were 3M and DuPont. There is no evidence to indicate that these companies were aware of the dangers posed by PFAS.
By the mid-1970s, 3M and several other major manufacturers of AFFF were already well aware that the PFAS chemicals in AFFF were toxic to the environment. By the early 1990s, these companies were also becoming aware that PFAS may have adverse health effects on humans, including increased cancer rates.
Firefighting foam lawsuits are being filed nationwide against these manufacturers. Hundreds of AFFF lawsuits have already been filed, and those in federal court have already been consolidated into an MDL class action in South Carolina. An AFFF foam lawsuit will allege that 3M, DuPont, and other companies knowingly sold their AFFF products despite the known health risks.
How long with the AFFF firefighting foam lawsuits take to reach a settlement? That is a good question, and the answer is similar to the expected settlement amount question. It is speculation. The firefighter class action lawsuit is fluid and our AFFF lawyers will continue to keep readers of this site updated on any new developments. If history is a guide, we can expect an AFFF class-action lawsuit settlement in the next 12-24 months.
It is not just cancer victims who are bringing AFFF lawsuits. States are also bringing firefighting foam lawsuits. Most recently, North Carolina sued DuPont, Chemours, 3M, and others, alleging that firefighting foam contains toxic chemicals causing groundwater contamination.
These Are Water Contamination and Gear Lawsuits, Too
New studies confirm that PFAS are embedded in firefighter gear, with toxic chemicals concentrated in outer layers.
You did not just breathe it in or drink it. You wore it. Every call, every fire. And manufacturers knew.
Who Can File a Firefighting Foam Lawsuit?
To qualify as a plaintiff for an AFFF lawsuit, our law firm requires that you meet two basic criteria:
- Exposure to PFAS: Prospective plaintiffs must demonstrate that they regularly used or were otherwise exposed to firefighting foam over a prolonged period. If you regularly used AFFF as part of your job (e.g., firefighter, airport maintenance crew, factory worker, etc.) you should be able to satisfy this requirement without any issue.
- Cancer: Exposure to PFAS in firefighting foam alone is not enough to have a valid claim. Prospective plaintiffs in AFFF lawsuits must show that they were diagnosed with certain types of cancer after prolonged AFFF exposure. The types of cancer that are most strongly linked to firefighting foam are kidney and testicular cancer. Pancreatic and prostate cancer have also been connected to AFFF use.
Other law firms may have different criteria to review your potential AFFF lawsuit.
Firefighting Foam Lawsuit Settlement Amounts
The AFF lawsuits will eventually end in some type of global, mass-tort settlement agreement orchestrated by firefighting foam lawyers that sit on the AFFF MDL Steering Committee. It will be incredibly complicated.
In any mass tort case, AFFF lawsuits will be even more complicated to settle. But the facts and history suggest an eventual global settlement. In this type of settlement, the defendants agree to pay a large amount of money into a global settlement fund, and payouts are distributed based on a formula.
The settlement amounts would be based on a tiered basis or on a points system. We will project settlement amounts with a tier system to simplify what will certainly be an intricate process.
Tier One Settlements
Plaintiffs in the top tier (those with the most serious injuries) get a higher amount and those plaintiffs in the 2nd and 3rd tiers receive smaller cash settlement payments.
In the AFFF firefighting foam cancer cases, the top-tier plaintiffs will likely include those individuals with long-term occupational exposure AND diagnosis with the most dangerous types of cancer linked to PFAS (pancreatic) and the injuries that have been classified as Tier 1 in the MDL: kidney cancer, testicular cancer, thyroid disease, ulcerative colitis.
These cases should have an average settlement range between $225,000 and $450,000, with some lawsuits getting much higher settlement amounts.
Tier Two Settlements
The second tier will probably include plaintiffs with long-term occupational exposure and diagnosis with a less dangerous type of AFFF-linked cancer.
The third tier (and lower) will cover those plaintiffs with less evidence of exposure or use of AFFF and/or plaintiffs with less serious injuries such as liver damage.
What can we expect AFFF lawsuit settlement amounts to be? That question is a moving target and, at this point, pure speculation.
Yet lawyers talk about settlement amounts of cases, and we will share our speculation with you. Based on global settlements in prior mass tort cases, our attorneys anticipate that the top-tier plaintiffs in the AFFF settlement will get somewhere between $200,000 to $500,000.
Second-tier plaintiffs could expect to receive a settlement in the range of $150,000 to $300,000.
Tier Three Settlements
The third tier and lower will probably receive $75,000 or less in settlement amounts.
Stating the obvious again: this is naked speculation. You will not truly know the settlement payout of an AFFF foam lawsuit until a settlement is reached. But we can use the injuries and similar types of mass tort cases in the past to make an effort to project what these settlement values might be.
⏰ If You Were Exposed and Diagnosed, This Is the Window to File
Firefighters, veterans, and others with long-term AFFF exposure who are now facing cancer are running out of time.
This MDL is moving fast toward resolution, and waiting could mean missing out on the settlement window.
If you qualify, the time to act is now.
What Are the Defenses to the AFFF Lawsuit?
The AFFF foam lawsuits are a challenge for defense lawyers looking to avoid spending billions of dollars in settlements for AFFF victims. So 3M, DuPont, Tyco, and the other defendants are trying to hide behind the government to say the government knew of the risks of AFFF and asked them to continue to manufacture the product.
Many AFFF lawsuits are indeed premised on the government’s use of MilSpec AFFF. Many PFSA lawsuits allege the fluorocarbon surfactant components of MilSpec AFFF were unreasonably dangerous because they contained PFAS, PFOA, PFOS, and other PFAS that break down into PFOS or PFOA.
This effort to hide behind the government’s skirt is called the government contractor defense. This doctrine shields contractors from liability for damages from products meeting specific specifications to achieve military objectives. They contend that the government not only “approved” but wrote, issued, updated, and enforced the precise specifications for MilSpec AFFF that required fluorocarbon surfactant.
3M tried this very same defense recently in the earplug litigation. The MDL class action judge, in that case, rejected the government-contractor defense because the military did not request a design proposal for the earplugs and there was no competitive bidding process that allowed the military to approve precise design specifications.
In their motion for partial summary judgment filed on n the AFFF class action lawsuit in the MDL, the defendants claim that they were required to use fluorocarbons in the product. Plaintiff’s AFFF lawyers will argue in their response that the design specification from the defendant was not sufficiently detailed.
More importantly, the defendants lose their protection under this doctrine because they failed to disclose what they know about PFAS risks. Knowing what is in a product and that it might be dangerous in some contexts is very different from advising the military of the specific risk of a PFAS in AFFF.
The court denied this motion. This was a huge win for plaintiffs.
Contact Miller & Zois to File Your Firefighting Foam Lawsuit
Our AFFF lawyers are currently accepting new water contamination and firefighting foam cases from clients who meet the following illness:
- Ulcerative colitis
- Liver cancer
- Kidney cancer
- Testicular cancer
- Thyroid disease/hypothyroidism
- Thyroid cancer
Contact us immediately to get your AFFF claim filed as soon as possible. You may be entitled to participate in the AFFF lawsuit settlement if you have developed cancer as a result of AFFF foam exposure. Our firefighting foam lawyers stand ready to assist with your potential claim. Call our firefighting foam law firm today at 800-553-8082.