PFAS Litigation Updates

FILTER BY STATE

CA, DC, DE, FL, GA, MD, MI, MN, NC, NJ, NM, NV, NY, NC, OH, SC, TX, VT, WA

The world of PFAS litigation is quickly evolving. As regulatory scrutiny of these compounds increases, so, too, will the body of associated case law. From class actions to multidistrict litigation, this section will regularly highlight developments in PFAS-related litigation.

Content in this section does not reflect the opinion of Alston & Bird or its attorneys.

Please note, a subscription may be required to view some of this content.

 

Read the PFAS Primer Quarterly Update

Subscribe
Previous Issues

In Florida, Personal Jurisdiction Exists Where Liability is Inherited from Predecessor

A federal district court judge denied Corteva Inc. and DuPont de Nemours Inc.’s motion to dismiss a lawsuit brought again them for lack of personal jurisdiction. The companies claimed that the plaintiff, the city of Stuart, Florida, lacked jurisdiction over them because they are based in Delaware, but the court disagreed. The court held that personal jurisdiction existed over both companies because the companies each contractually assumed the historic liabilities of their predecessor.

March 10, 2022 | In Re: Aqueous Film-Forming Foams Products Liability Litigation Case No. 2:18-mn-2873 (D.S.C.)

Federal Judge Denies Hampton Couples’ Motion for a Preliminary Injunction to Stop Onshore Trenching Near Alleged PFAS-Contaminated Groundwater

Two couples in East Hampton, New York filed suit against the U.S. Department of the Interior and other federal agencies, alleging violations of the National Environmental Policy Act, Administrative Procedures Act, and other environmental laws, by allegedly failing to adequately review the effects of an offshore commercial windfarm project, which required onshore trenching, on PFAS-contaminated groundwater. The court denied a motion for preliminary injunction to prevent South Fork Wind, LLC, the project developer, from excavating trenches near their homes to store underground cables designed to transfer energy from the offshore commercial wind farm to an onshore electric grid, which the residents claimed would disturb and exacerbate the alleged PFAS in groundwater.

March 9, 2022 (complaint filed); April 12, 2022 (preliminary injunction denied) | Mahoney v. Dep’t of the Interior Case No. 2:22-cv-01305-FB-ST (E.D.N.Y.)

Suit Brought Against Chemical Companies Accused of Hiding Risks of PFAS

3M, DuPont de Nemours, The Chemours Co., and others were sued in South Carolina federal court by a man who alleges that he developed prostate cancer from his exposure to firefighting foam containing PFAS. The complaint alleges negligence, design defect, battery, inadequate warning, and other causes of action. The plaintiff claims that the companies performed animal testing which indicated that exposure to the chemicals caused adverse health effects. The plaintiff also claims the companies performed additional research and testing which found multiple possible health effects among workers exposed to PFAS. Despite this testing, plaintiff alleges, the companies told the U.S. EPA that there were no risks associated with being exposed to PFAS. Representatives for the companies maintain that the companies acted responsibly in connection with products containing PFAS.

March 7, 2022 | Sanders et al. v. 3M Company Case No. 2:22-cv-00723 (D.S.C.)

9th Circuit Keeps 3M PFAS Case in Federal Court

The Orange County Water District, along with several other cities, sued 3M and other companies in California state court in 2020, alleging their operations polluted the local surface water and groundwater with PFAS. 3M removed the state complaint to federal court in 2021, arguing that at least some PFAS releases were the result of product sales to the U.S. military, and so the company plans to assert the federal government contractor defense, making federal court the proper venue. The federal district court disagreed that the case was properly in federal court and sent the case back down to state court. The 9th Circuit reversed, holding that the case had properly been removed to federal court based on 3M’s arguments.

March 1, 2022 | Orange County Water District et al. v. 3M Co. et al. Case No. 21-55778 (9th Cir.)

Chemours’ Motion to Dismiss Investor Suit Denied

Partially granting DuPont’s motion to dismiss, a Delaware District Court is allowing a consolidated class action alleging that the DuPont spinoff, Chemours knowingly hid the extent of its environmental remediation liabilities from investors. In particular, the investors’ suit points to PFAS as the basis for their allegations, claiming that Chemours “dramatically mischaracterized” its financial condition and “vastly understated” its liabilities “from decades of environmental pollution” in five filings with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission between 2018 and 2019.

February 24, 2022 | In re The Chemours Company Securities Litigation Case No. 19-1911 (D. Del.)