Tyco and 3M Ask for MDL Treatment in Dozens of Firefighting Foam Lawsuits
The lawsuits come on the heels of a $670.7 million settlement with DuPont and Chemours Co. last year involving an MDL over a related chemical that has been linked to cancer and hypertension in pregnant women and other illnesses.
October 02, 2018 at 02:50 PM
5 minute read
Manufacturers of foams used to fight fuel fires have asked to coordinate about 85 lawsuits that allege toxic chemicals in their products have leaked into drinking water, putting residents at risk of getting cancer and other illnesses.
In a motion filed last week, Tyco Fire Products LP and Chemguard Inc. asked the U.S. Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation to send 75 cases to Massachusetts, where a federal judge is overseeing four actions “well into the litigation process.” The cases span seven states: Colorado, Delaware, Florida, Massachusetts, New York, Pennsylvania and Washington. 3M Co. filed a motion two days later to add nine more lawsuits from Alabama, Michigan, Minnesota and upstate New York.
The motions come after a federal judge in Colorado issued a Sept. 25 order in a class action brought on behalf of 64,000 residents of communities near Colorado Springs. They claim chemicals from the foam—referred to in court papers as aqueous film-forming foams—at the Peterson Air Force Base and the Colorado Springs Municipal Airport have leaked into their drinking water, causing pregnancy problems and kidney and thyroid diseases. They are seeking a medical monitoring fund and compensation for lost property values.
Plaintiffs in that case have filed a class certification motion, which the manufacturers have opposed. The motion goes before U.S. District Judge R. Brooke Jackson of the District of Colorado on Nov. 30—one day after the MDL panel's next hearing in New York.
“This is a case we've been aggressively litigating for two years now,” said Hunter Shkolnik, whose New York firm, Napoli Shkolnik, is involved in a large share of the foam cases, including the Colorado class action. “And, on the eve of a class certification in Colorado, the defendants are doing everything in their power to remove the case from Judge Jackson. And it's nothing more than forum shopping.”
Stephen Raber, a partner at Williams & Connolly in Washington, D.C., filed the motion on behalf of Tyco and Chemguard, both part of Johnson Controls. He did not respond to a request for comment.
Fraser Engerman, a spokesman for Johnson Controls, said in a statement: “Tyco and Chemguard acted appropriately and responsibly in connection with products containing PFOA, including aqueous film forming foams (AFFFs). AFFFs have prevented catastrophic fires and saved many lives, which is why the U.S. military and fire-fighting professionals have chosen to use them for decades and continue to use them today.”
3M attorney Timothy Bishop, a partner at Mayer Brown in Chicago, did not respond to a request for comment.
The lawsuits come on the heels of a $670.7 million settlement with DuPont and Chemours Co. last year involving multidistrict litigation over a related chemical, C8, a type of perfluorooctanoic acid, or PFOA, used to make Teflon and other household items that has been linked to cancer, hypertension in pregnant women and other illnesses.
The new cases focus primarily on foams used at military bases, airports and other sites to fight fuel fires. In 2016, the Environmental Protection Agency issued recommendations on the safe level of those chemicals in drinking water.
Among the New York sites referenced in the complaints are New York Stewart International Airport, Stewart Air National Guard Base, Francis S. Gabreski Airport and East Hampton Airport. Pennsylvania sites involve the Naval Air Station Joint Reserve Base Willow Grove and the Naval Air Warfare Center in Warminster. Two separate complaints mention New Castle Airport in Delaware and Pensacola International Airport in Florida.
Other defendants include National Foam Inc., Buckeye Fire Equipment Co. and United Technologies Corp.'s Kidde division. In a few cases, the defendants include local governments, and a case brought by the city of Newburgh, New York, names the U.S. government, U.S. Department of Defense and U.S. Air Force. In their Sept. 25 motion, Tyco and Chemguard said they anticipated asserting a “governmental contractor defense.”
The cases are a hodgepodge of class actions, individual personal injury lawsuits and actions brought by water districts and other municipal entities. But Tyco and Chemguard want all of them in the same MDL.
“The panel has almost always found that centralization is appropriate in purported environmental contamination cases—including cases involving one of the chemicals at issue in this litigation, PFOA,” Raber wrote, citing the C8 cases.
3M's motion, filed on Sept. 27, addressed a separate set of cases involving products sold to third parties or manufactured at its own facilities. In its motion, 3M said more than 100 additional cases are pending in state courts in Alabama and Michigan. In February, 3M agreed to pay $850 million to settle a case by the state of Minnesota over water pollution from its manufacturing plant.
Both motions asked to send the cases to U.S. District Judge Denise Casper, who on Dec. 18 dismissed some of the claims in a case brought by Barnstable County, Massachusetts, alleging water contamination from the Barnstable County Fire Rescue Training Academy. As an alternative, they suggest U.S. District Judge Kenneth Karas in the Southern District of New York, who is overseeing four cases, including the city of Newburgh's case.
The motions come after Jackson ruled against the defendants in the Colorado class action, concluding that the Colorado Supreme Court “would probably recognize a claim for medical monitoring absent present physical injury.” But he agreed that the complaint lacked specifics about medical testing, so he dismissed the medical monitoring claims so that plaintiffs could amend the complaint.
On Monday, Jackson denied a motion the defendants filed to stay the Colorado class action.
In addition to the class action, nearly 7,000 individuals alleging personal injuries have brought more than 40 cases in Colorado that would be part of an MDL, if granted.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllPaul Weiss’ Shanmugam Joins 11th Circuit Fight Over False Claims Act’s Constitutionality
‘A Force of Nature’: Littler Mendelson Shareholder Michael Lotito Dies At 76
3 minute readUS Reviewer of Foreign Transactions Sees More Political, Policy Influence, Say Observers
'Unlawful Release'?: Judge Grants Preliminary Injunction in NASCAR Antitrust Lawsuit
3 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Appellate Division Greenlights State Bar's Leadership Diversity Initiatives
- 2SEC’s Latest Enforcement Actions Fuel Demand for Big Law
- 3Sterlington Brings On Former Office Leader From Ashurst
- 4DOJ Takes on Largest NFT Scheme That Points to Larger Trend
- 5Arnold & Porter Matches Market Year-End Bonus, Requires Billable Threshold for Special Bonuses
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250