Daikin’s Attempt to Certify Questions Concerning PFAS-Manufacturers’ Liability to Georgia Supreme Court Denied

In February 2021, Earl Parris, Jr. filed a class action complaint, and later an amended complaint, in the Northern District of Georgia against Daikin America (“Daikin”), Inc., and other defendants, alleging discharges of PFAS-contaminated sludge and biosolids into the Raccoon Creek watershed. The court denied of Daikin’s Motion to Dismiss and request to certify questions…

Plaintiffs Contend Georgia Public Utility is Not Immune from Public Nuisance Claims

Dalton Utilities, a Georgia public utility involved in pending PFAS litigation in Georgia, appealed a ruling from the Northern District of Georgia partially denying the utility’s motion to dismiss. The Northern District held that Dalton Utilities is not entitled to sovereign immunity on Plaintiff Jarrod Johnson’s claim for nuisance abatement. Johnson urged the Eleventh Circuit…

Georgia Court Allows Pollution Claims to Withstand Motion to Dismiss in Carpet Industry PFAS Case

Judge Amy Totenberg of the Northern District of Georgia allowed most claims in a proposed class action on behalf of people in Rome, Georgia supplied with drinking water downstream of Dalton, Georgia to proceed against 3M and numerous carpet and chemical companies. Judge Totenberg allowed negligence claims to proceed against manufacturers of carpet products but…

|

Residents Near Summerville, Georgia File Suit, Alleging Contamination of Farms and Town Water Supply

Residents and property owners near Summerville, Georgia filed a putative class action alleging PFAS-contaminated sludge and biosolids from Trion, Georgia’s water pollution control plant are migrating and contaminating their properties and farms. Plaintiffs’ complaint, which alleges causes of action in tort and under the Clean Water Act and Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, seeks injunctive…

CAFA Jurisdiction Keeps Putative Class in Federal Court

After 3M removed this putative class action to the NDGA, Judge Totenberg asked the parties to show cause why the case should not be remanded to state court for lack of jurisdiction. After both sides agreed CAFA supplied jurisdiction, the Court decided not to remand the case, noting the inapplicability of CAFA’s exceptions due to…