Lawsuit Help Desk

PFAS Lawsuits and Settlements

Were you diagnosed with ulcerative colitis, testicular cancer, kidney cancer, pancreatic cancer, liver cancer or prostate cancer (50 or under upon diagnosis) in 2000 or later? Have you drunk from a PFAS contaminated water supply from 1990 to the present (for at least 6 consecutive months)? We’ve identified the PFAS contaminated water supplies that qualify below on this page. 

If yes, then there is a real likelihood you would qualify for a PFAS lawsuit and settlement opportunity. 

Will your leading mass torts
firms take my case?

Contact us to find out (We’ll get back to you the same day)

"*" indicates required fields

I represent, understand and agree that: 1) I am 18 years of age or older; 2) I have read and agree to’s Terms of Service, Privacy Policy, that the representations here are Paid Attorney Advertising, and additional legal disclaimers herein (if any); 3) submitting this form does not create an attorney-client relationship; 4) I am not already represented by an attorney for this matter; and 5) I consent to be contacted under the Terms and Conditions of Contact in order to discuss my legal options, so that I may obtain legal representation.

Why Are PFAS Lawsuits Being Filed?

Perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) lawsuits are predicated on the claim that businesses contaminated water supplies with these dangerous chemicals, causing cancer and other severe health issues for people impacted. Due of their inability to degrade, PFAS, sometimes known as “forever chemicals,” have been widely used in the US since the 1940s.

Further, PFAS can be found in a variety of commonplace things like cookware, firefighting foam, carpet, and packaging. As a result, their harmful carcinogenic qualities are widely exposed through the water, soil, and air.

Perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS) and perfluorooctanoic acid are the two most common PFAS and PFCs. (PFOA). These harmful and persistent substances can build up in the environment. This has resulted in an increase in recent years in the number of legal claims.

Some of these cases include:

  • Cities and towns have taken legal action against chemical manufacturers and industries for contaminating water supplies with PFAS. 
  • Individuals who have suffered health problems, including cancer, due to exposure to PFAS-contaminated drinking water, have filed numerous lawsuits. 

In contaminated municipalities, higher mortality rates for certain causes of death possibly linked to PFAS exposure were observed when compared to uncontaminated municipalities with similar socioeconomic status and smoking behaviors. These findings require further in-depth analysis at the individual level to establish causative connections.

Uric Acid

Regarding the impact on human health, the majority of effects were seen in groups with professional exposure to PFAS. This included elevated levels of uric acid and cholesterol in workers at PFOA production facilities, as well as an increased risk of liver and kidney cancer and leukemia among those involved in the production of fluorinated polymers.


Additionally, there were reports of elevated mortality or incidence rates for various health issues, such as prostate, bladder and pancreatic cancer, cerebrovascular diseases, diabetes, and chronic renal diseases, among other workers with exposure to PFAS.

The Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR) has acknowledged the impact that exposure to high levels of PFAS may have on the human immune system. As per the agency, a review conducted by the National Toxicology Program found that PFAS can suppress antibody response in both animals and humans.

Numerous studies have explored the effects of exposure to per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances, which can include: kidney cancer, testicular cancer, liver cancer, prostate cancer, ulcerative colitis, elevated cholesterol levels, reduced infant birth weights, alterations in liver enzymes, and an increased risk of high blood pressure or pre-eclampsia during pregnancy.

PFAS are synthetic chemicals created by humans that do not occur naturally in the environment. They pose a significant toxicity threat to both humans and animals, and are highly resistant to degradation, earning them the label of “forever chemicals.”

Ohio study

Several types of cancer are  associated with PFAS exposure. A study published by the NCBI, which involved more than 25,000 cancer patients in Ohio and West Virginia in an area with PFOA-contaminated drinking water, showed a connection between PFOA and cancer.

The study found that elevated levels of PFOA in the blood may be linked to various cancers, including prostate, ovarian, testicular, and kidney cancer, as well as non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma.

Other studies have suggested a connection between the toxic chemical and breast cancer and liver cancer, and additional links to other cancers may exist. The research on the health effects of PFAS on humans is ongoing.

LARC study

The International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) has classified PFOA as possibly carcinogenic to humans based on evidence suggesting that it can cause testicular and kidney cancer. The EPA also recognizes evidence linking PFAS to animal tumors and cancers in humans.

PFAS is a collective term for thousands of chemicals linked to harmful health effects such as cancer. With their widespread presence in the environment globally and in the United States, an increasing number of individuals claim that PFAS exposure has caused them to experience serious health problems.

PFAS is a group of about 12,000 compounds commonly used to make products resistant to water, stains, and heat. They are known as “forever chemicals” due to their inability to degrade naturally and are associated with a range of serious health issues, including cancer, kidney disease, liver problems, immune disorders, birth defects, and more.

2013 study

A study published in March 2013 in the journal Environmental Health Perspectives found an association between high levels of PFOA exposure and cancers of the testicle, ovarian, prostate, and kidney, as well as non-Hodgkin lymphoma. The study was based on an analysis of 18 cases of cancer that occurred within nine years across several counties in Ohio and West Virginia near a DuPont-owned Teflon manufacturing plant in Parkersburg, WV. These findings provide further evidence of the public health concerns associated with PFAS, including their links to cancer.

Inhance uses fluorinated gas to treat plastic containers, creating a barrier that prevents product degradation. Consumer groups claim that this process generates PFAS, including PFOA, one of the most toxic compounds in the class. The EPA implemented regulations in 2020 requiring companies that produce long-chain PFAS to submit for safety review and approval.

The lawsuit accuses that Inhance failed to comply with these requirements and seeks a court order directing the company to stop all manufacture and processing of long-chain PFAS during the fluorination of plastic containers.

Lawsuits have been brought against chemical manufacturers and industrial companies by municipalities over water contamination caused by PFAS throughout the country.

January 2023

With fewer new cases being brought to the Multi-District Litigation (MDL) in South Carolina, the status of the PFAS litigation involving AFFF fire fighting foam changed. The number of new cases added to the MDL decreased from an average of 100 each month to 49 in the most recent monthly period.

This takes the overall number of active cases to 3,387 at this time. In the forthcoming bellwether trial case of City of Stuart v. 3M Company, several defendants moved for summary judgment, while the plaintiffs in the AFFF litigation filed a response.

The defendants had argued that there was insufficient proof connecting their goods to the tainted water in the City of Stuart. To refute this claim,

2022 class action

In 2022, a consumer class action lawsuit was filed against McDonald’s for using PFAS-contaminated packaging in their food. Additionally, many individuals who have suffered health problems, including cancer, as a result of exposure to PFAS-contaminated drinking water have also filed lawsuits.

In 2017, DuPont negotiated a $670 million settlement to cover damages brought on by the chemical C8, which was released into the Ohio River.

A $380 million jury verdict against DuPont for poisoning a town in West Virginia was handed down in 2007.

Since 2005, federal courts have received almost 6,400 lawsuits pertaining to PFAS.

Agrico and Conoco were penalized $70 million in 2001 for contaminating a Florida waterway in Pensacola.

Do I qualify for a PFAS lawsuit?

You may qualify to file  a PFAS lawsuit if you meet these criteria:

  • If you (1) drank from tap water for 6 or more months between 1990 and the present, and (2) received a 2000 or later diagnosis of: Ulcerative Colitis, Testicular Cancer,  Kidney Cancer, Pancreatic Cancer, Prostate Cancer (under 50 at diagnosis) or Liver Cancer; and 
  • If you reside in one of the following  cities:
    • Alabama (Centre, Guin, Saraland or Satsuma)
    • Alaska (Fairbanks North Star Borough)
    • California (San Jose, Fresno or  East LA)
    • Colorado (Colorado Springs)
    • Florida (Pensacola or Stuart)
    • Illinois(Collinsville)
    • Massachusetts (Ayer, Easton, Hyannis or  Lanesborough)
    • New Hampshire (Portsmouth)
    • New Jersey
    • New York (Hampton Bays)
    • North Carolina (Maysville, Brunswick)
    • Ohio (Dayton)
    • Pennsylvania (Warminster, Warrington)
    • New Hampshire (Portsmouth)
    • New Jersey
    • Pennsylvania (Warminster or Warrington)
    • South Carolina (Charleston, Clinton)
woman who is studying PFAS and considering filing a PFAS lawsuit
weighing the benefits of PFAS lawsuit

What are my legal fees if your lawyers take my PFAS lawsuit?

There is no upfront payment at all.

The legal representation will be entirely contingent fee. That means that all legal costs and expenses are borne by the law firm representing you. You pay nothing out of pocket. The legal costs and expenses come out of the settlement or award you receive. 

Also, unlike most other mass torts sites, Lawsuit Help Desk gives you access to the top PFAS lawsuit experts. 

And what happens on the off chance the case is not settled or won? You will owe nothing because the risk is entirely borne by law firm representing you.

How much can I recover from my PFAS Lawsuit?

Mass torts cases frequently provide very high dollar settlements, where each plaintiff receives as recovery in the hundreds of thousands or even millions of dollars. So far, the settlement amounts range from $70,000 to $670,000 million. Of course, the amount depends on the resulting injury.

Having said that, we believe that there is no compensation that makes up for an injury. 

But now that your family is dealing with the pain and suffering, through no fault of your own, you may be entitled to very significant financial compensation. 

Further, you would be entitled to recover past, present and future medical and mental health bills, as well as lost wages. Recovery amounts also compensate for non-economic losses, such as past, present and future pain and suffering, loss of consortium (companionship), and emotional distress. 

celebrating a PFAS lawsuit settlement
lawyer counseling about PFAS lawsuit

If I’m qualified, do I have any obligations to you or your lawyers?

No, you do not have any obligation to us.

If you’re qualified. If we find that you are qualified, and you wish to proceed with the mass torts firms we have provided for you, the lawyers will discuss the retention agreement with you.

How long do I have to file my PFAS lawsuit?

You have to act quickly! Do it, even if it’s not with us.

Why? Statutes of limitations and lagging scientific research may prevent your recovery.

Also, if you file late, you may miss important settlement opportunities.  That’s why it’s very important to secure legal representation as soon as possible. In fact, one of our lawyers’ first actions for you will be to check your state’s statute of limitations and repose. 

Each state has its own statutes of limitations (SOL) and statutes of repose for each type of damage. (SOR).

These rules forbid the filing or enforcement of litigation after certain deadlines, which vary from state to state.

So, even if a lawsuit is filed after these times, it will be dismissed and you won’t be able to recover anything.

It may have taken years for scientific research to show a connection between PFAS and all types of cancer that a plaintiff suffers.

This is why you should talk to our PFAS lawsuit attorneys now for more details.

You can miss substantial settlement opportunities.

Manufacturers very often settle cases with thousands of defendants at a time.

However, in order to qualify as a recovery victim, your lawyer must have already filed your lawsuit.

Note that contrary to urban myth, lawyers have an obligation to the court to observe due diligence in seeing whose cases qualify based on leading medical research.

lawyers sprinting to file a PFAS lawsuit
client contacts lawyer about PFAS lawsuit

What are my next steps to file and settle my PFAS lawsuit?

You simply need to contact us for a quick and stress-free assessment.

Do it today! Get peace of mind. 

Also, save every document our attorneys may need as evidence starting now. 

Discuss these and more with our PFAS lawsuit experts. 

Why Lawsuit Help Desk?

Unlike most others, we do not act like third-party middlemen

Rather, Lawsuit Help Desk provides you immediate access to the top 1%, nationally renowned mass torts attorneys, with deep knowledge in PFAS litigation. It is these leading lawyers who decide whether your case has merit. We will be forthright and honest with you.

Our mission is to inform the public, and provide direct access to leaders in the world of mass torts. 

We are not that annoying call center. We will respect your time. We will not hand you off, or give you the run around. 

We do not consider ourselves a marketing firm. Do not expect robocalls from us. If you’re emailed, it’s just to provide you helpful information, such as case status and ongoing research; you will not get spammy emails. We are here to help, not badger you.

A key distinction is that we have active attorneys and litigators on our staff. Do you really want advice about a mass tort that’s devastated your loved one’s lives — where settlements in the hundreds of thousands and millions are common — from a marketing or social media expert, a lifestyle coach, a psychologist or an influencer? In other words, we are not parroting talking points: We really know what we’re talking about. 

In fact, Lawsuit Help Desk was founded by Cameron Tousi, a leader in the world of complex litigation. He has received highest distinctions in peer reviews and awards from America’s leading legal publications. If you’d like to speak with Cameron, just let us know, and we’ll make it happen! 

Monthly Status Updates: PFAS Lawsuits

February 1, 2023

In Cook County Circuit Court in Illinois, Attorney General Kwame Raoul filed a case against 14 manufacturers. Attorney General of Illinois Kwame Raoul has filed a lawsuit in Cook County Circuit Court against a number of PFAS (per- and polyfluoroalkyl compounds), commonly referred to as “forever chemicals,” producers.

These manufacturers are charged in the case with advertising dangerous chemicals as harmless while being aware of the risks they bring to human health and the environment. Raoul has taken action against PFAS before; in March 2022, he sued 3M for managing PFAS in a way that caused continuing contamination at their factory in Cordova, Illinois.

Atty. General Raoul

The makers of PFAS were allegedly aware of the poisonous and detrimental effects of these compounds on human health and the environment for a long time, according to the case brought by Attorney General Kwame Raoul in Cook County Circuit Court.

Despite being aware of this, the producers are charged with continuing to advertise PFAS as being safe to produce and use. The case also claims that the producers falsified scientific data regarding the risks posed by PFAS, harmed Illinois’ natural resources, and contaminated large areas of the state.


Recently, the AFFF firefighting foam class action Multi-District Litigation (MDL) in South Carolina has seen a high influx of new cases, with over 100 new cases being added each month. However, in the last monthly period, the number of new cases added to the MDL dropped to 49, bringing the total number of pending cases to 3,387.

In response to a summary judgment motion filed by a group of defendants in the upcoming bellwether trial case, City of Stuart v. 3M Company, the plaintiffs in the AFFF litigation filed a response opposing the motion. 

MDL Update

The defense claimed that there was insufficient evidence linking their products to the water contamination in the City of Stuart. To refute this claim, the plaintiffs must demonstrate that the connection between the defendant’s products and the water contamination is genuinely in dispute.

Their response cites expert testimony and evidence from the record to establish the connection between the defendant’s products and the water supply contamination.

January 30, 2023

Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel made an announcement regarding a settlement in a lawsuit against Asahi Kasei Plastics North America, Inc. The lawsuit aimed to address releases of PFAS (per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances) at Asahi’s former facility near Brighton, Michigan.

The settlement requires Asahi to investigate the presence of PFAS in soil, groundwater, and surface water discharged from the former facility and to take action to address levels that exceed state criteria. The agreement, known as the Consent Decree, was filed in the Livingston County Circuit Court and will become effective once it is approved by the court.

Asahi lawsuit

Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel has announced the successful outcome of a lawsuit against Asahi Kasei Plastics North America, Inc. to address releases of PFAS at their former facility near Brighton, Michigan.

Nessel emphasized that this settlement represents a significant step in her efforts to protect the public and the environment from harmful PFAS contamination, and to hold companies responsible for such contamination.

Under the agreement, Asahi will have to comply with a schedule for investigating and addressing PFAS releases into soil, groundwater, and surface water.

The Michigan Department of Environment, Great Lakes, and Energy (EGLE) will review and approve Asahi’s plans. Dan Eichinger, acting director of EGLE, praised Nessel’s work and emphasized EGLE’s ongoing commitment to addressing PFAS contamination and holding polluters accountable.


Asahi was one of 17 companies that was named as a defendant in Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel’s first lawsuit against PFAS manufacturers, which was filed in 2020 under the guidance of Special Assistant Attorneys General (SAAGs). This lawsuit was initiated to provide relief to communities impacted by PFAS contamination. The case against Asahi was separated from the larger suit and was dealt with in the Livingston County Circuit Court before Judge Michael P. Hatty. Currently, there are six PFAS cases pending in both state and federal court, and the Asahi case is the first to be resolved.

The settlement requires Asahi to pay for past and future oversight costs, litigation costs, and the attorney fees of the SAAGs for this case, which means that these costs will not be passed on to taxpayers.

Additionally, the agreement requires Asahi to investigate the release of PFAS into soil, groundwater, and surface water from its former facility, and if concentrations that exceed state criteria are found, to undertake response actions to address the issue. 

December 7, 2022

The frequency of cases involving per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) has been rising in both state and federal courts in the United States as of December 7, 2022. Due to their resilience to disintegration, these synthetic chemicals are known as “forever chemicals” and have been the focus of numerous research that link them to health issues.

These PFAS-related cases now include wider variety of claimants, including owners of both PFAS manufacturing facilities and facilities like air bases that just employ PFAS-containing goods.

Beyond water contamination

In addition, it is now beyond water contamination. Thus, the forms of harm for which compensation is being sought has increased.

The most recent instances also involve claims of breaking consumer protection rules. This is because products thought to contain PFAS weren’t properly labeled or weren’t warned to contain them.

Additionally, PFAS lawsuits, including claims for personal injury from users of PFAS-containing products, are anticipated to rise.

The development of toxicity studies, which emphasizes the dangers of PFAS exposure, as well as an increase in the number of lawsuits filed by local government bodies, such the most recent ones by Baltimore and Philadelphia, are what are fueling this trend..

October 31, 2022

A U.S. District Judge Evelyn Padin denied 3M Co.’s request to withdraw from a case brought by Middlesex Water.

The water utility claims that the global corporation contaminated the drinking water by discharging dangerous compounds, or “forever chemicals,” into the environment. Middlesex Water was unable to demonstrate that the contamination was due to 3M’s business activities in producing or distributing the chemicals, according to 3M’s defense.

Further, the judge sided with Middlesex Water over 3M’s concerns, and the lawsuit will go forward as a result. Since then, 3M and other PFAS (per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances) chemical manufacturers have been the target of hundreds of additional cases filed around the country.

People who live close to the locations where these chemicals were made believe that 3M’s operations contaminated local drinking water, resulting in a variety of health problems.

 September 16, 2022

A judge ruled against 3M in a Motion for Summary Judgment in the multidistrict litigation regarding Aqueous Film Forming Foams (AFFF). The company claimed immunity from liability for claimed damages since the foam was developed for the U.S. Navy and the defense limits its liability as a government contractor.

However, Judge Richard M. Gergel rejected this argument, stating that there were questions of fact regarding the government’s knowledge of the risks associated with AFFF. The judge cited records that showed the government was not aware of the presence of PFAS in AFFF until the year 2000, and that 3M had failed to disclose over 1,000 internal studies on PFAS toxicity and its presence in the foam. 

 September 6, 2022

The court’s ruling opened up the damages and punitive awards in the thousands of lawsuits filed against 3M and other companies that manufactured PFAS-containing AFFF. The scope of these cases continues to expand, as more plaintiffs join the litigation and new legal theories are developed. 

Since then, there have been several updates regarding lawsuits filed by state and local governments as well as individual property owners related to PFAS contamination. 

 July 2022

the AFFF class action MDL saw an update with the defendants filing a motion for partial summary judgment. The motion argues that they have immunity from the lawsuit under the government contractor defense, as the federal government approved the specifications for a specific type of AFFF (MilSpec AFFF).

Both sides have been preparing their arguments, with oral arguments set for August 19th. The outcome of this motion could have a significant impact on the MDL, as if it is granted, it could dismiss a large portion of the defendants.

MDL update

Over the last month, the number of active cases in the AFFF MDL increased to 2,700 with 115 new cases being transferred into the MDL.

A growing number of these cases are PFAS water contamination claims by individuals who lived near military bases where firefighting foam was frequently used. These plaintiffs accuse that the use of AFFF led to the contamination of their water supply with PFAS, resulting in adverse health consequences.

Separate MDL

In a separate MDL, the 3M Company is facing claims that its firefighting foam contained PFAS chemicals and caused contamination of water sources. In July, the defendants filed an appeal to the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals on an order denying their motion to dismiss. The lawsuit seeks compensation for plaintiffs who claim they were exposed to contaminated drinking water due to 3M’s production of AFFF containing PFAS chemicals. 

The other major development in July was with regard to the class action suits filed against manufacturers of products containing PFAS chemicals such as Scotchgard and Teflon. This month, the U.S. Supreme Court declined to review a decision by the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals which allowed the class action suit against DuPont to move forward. This means that the plaintiffs in this case will be able to seek compensation from DuPont for damages caused by exposure to PFAS chemicals produced or used by the company. 

Overall, it was an active month for PFAS litigation as both sides geared up for many of the big cases coming down the pipeline this year and next. The decisions made in these cases will have a significant impact on how future claims are handled and can affect hundreds of thousands of individuals who were exposed to PFAS chemicals.

June 15th, 2022

The AFFF firefighting foam multi-district litigation (MDL) in South Carolina had a total of 2,586 pending cases. During the last month, 92 new plaintiffs joined the MDL, with more than half of them accusing that their cancer was caused by occupational exposure to firefighting foam. The remaining new cases were brought by municipalities that claim that the use of AFFF has contaminated their local water supplies.

New parties

In addition, the nationwide class action lawsuit against the manufacturers of per- and poly-fluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) has been proceeding in a federal court in Minnesota.

During the last month, three new parties joined the suit, including two private citizens and an environmental organization that is seeking to hold manufacturers accountable for their role in creating the PFAS contamination crisis. The case is currently awaiting a ruling on whether or not it will be certified as a class action. 

While Michigan recently filed a lawsuit against five firms, accusing them of creating significant PFAS pollution throughout the state, Maine recently modified its complaint to add several additional defendants. PFAS lawsuits continue in Pennsylvania, New Jersey, and North Carolina.

PFAS lawsuit class action update

In the May 2022 update of the PFAS class action, new information has been revealed about the dangers of firefighting foam. A recent research study has discovered that chronic exposure to PFAS, the toxic chemicals found in products such as AFFF foam, can have a negative impact on the bones of adolescent males.

Apparently, the study found that males aged 12 to 19 with higher levels of PFAS in their blood had reduced bone mineral density, which can lead to other health problems. This new information further highlights the health hazards of AFFF fire fighting foam and the importance of addressing these concerns.  

New Developments

Additionally, there have been several new developments in the ongoing court cases involving PFAS contamination. A number of lawsuits have been filed from communities across the US against corporations responsible for using and manufacturing AFFF foam. These suits accuse that companies involved in the production of this product were negligent and aware of its dangers, but failed to take action to prevent exposure. As these cases continue to progress, we will keep you updated on any new information or rulings related to them. 

New laws

Finally, a number of states are now taking steps to address PFAS pollution caused by firefighting foam products. Several states including Michigan, California, New Jersey and Vermont have passed legislation or regulations limiting the use of PFAS-containing foam at airports and other sites. Other states are considering similar action, and some are even introducing legislation to require the testing of drinking water sources for PFAS contamination. These developments show that state governments are taking steps to address the environmental impact of AFFF foam and other PFAS chemicals. 

South Carolina update

In the April 2022 update on the PFAS class action, the number of pending lawsuits has increased to over 2,300 cases consolidated in the District of South Carolina. The defendants in the AFFF cases have taken legal action by filing a motion seeking partial summary judgment, claiming immunity under the government contractor defense. 

In addition, several states have filed lawsuits against 3M and other companies accusing that they are responsible for the release of PFAS into the environment. The defendants in these cases continue to dispute liability, arguing that their products did not cause any harm. There has also been progress on a few state actions pertaining to toxic tort claims. This includes an amended complaint in New Jersey seeking damages from those responsible for environmental contamination caused by PFAS compounds. Lastly, several states have introduced bills addressing the issue of PFAS contamination. 

EPA update

At the federal level, the EPA continues to evaluate regulations on PFOA and PFOS chemicals under current laws and authorities such as the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA). The agency has announced plans to complete risk assessments for PFOA and PFOS by the end of 2022, with a proposed rule expected sometime this summer. In addition, Congress is currently considering the Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2022, which includes provisions to address PFAS contamination at military installations. 

Legislative updates

This month also saw progress on both federal and state legislative fronts. At the federal level, a bipartisan bill (the PFAS Action Act) was reintroduced in March that would authorize the EPA to regulate all per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) as hazardous substances under Superfund laws and set new drinking water standards for several PFAS chemicals. On the state level, multiple states have introduced bills addressing the issue of PFOA and other related chemicals found in drinking water. 

Wisconsin update

Finally, several courts have issued orders this month addressing issues pertaining to discovery and liability in PFAS cases. In the Eastern District of Wisconsin, a court granted summary judgment for the defendant in an AFFF case, finding that there was insufficient evidence of causation. The court found that although there were accusations of exposure to PFOA and PFOS, the plaintiff could not establish that any such exposure had caused their claimed injuries. 

Additionally, three other courts denied motions for final certification of classes in separate cases accusing contamination from PFAS chemicals. The courts held that the lead plaintiffs failed to provide sufficient evidence demonstrating commonality among class members’ claims or showing how the proposed classes met applicable legal requirements under Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

In summary, the litigation related to PFAS contamination continues to evolve and progress is being made on both the state and federal fronts.  It remains to be seen how these developments will affect future claims relating to the environmental impacts of PFOA and PFOS chemicals.  As always, legal counsel should be consulted for guidance and advice regarding any liability or exposure that may arise in connection with PFAS issues. 

News & Articles

Unraveling the PFAS Scandal: Is Your Water Supply The Silent Killer?

Unraveling the PFAS Scandal: Is Your Water Supply The Silent Killer?

Picture a silent, invisible enemy invisibly creeping into your home, nestling into the land you call your own, and slipping into the very water you drink. That's the persistent, pervasive threat posed by a group of man-made chemicals known as PFAS. These 'forever chemicals', owing to their resilient nature, have seeped into our lives – through water, soil, air, and everyday household items.

  • PFAS: A dangerously omnipresent entity. A potential health hazard?

Here's the alarming fact: the Environmental Working Group (EWG) estimates that over 100 million Americans may be consuming water polluted with these chemicals. And why is this cause for concern? It's because PFAS, in their silent offensive, might be wreaking havoc on our health.

  • There's smoke, but is there fire? The PFAS-health link debate

Scientific evidence, though still emerging, has begun to paint a disquieting picture. The C8 Health Project, a groundbreaking study on PFAS exposure, has found "probable links" between PFAS and multiple health issues – kidney and testicular cancer, thyroid disease, pregnancy-induced hypertension, and more.
Is the unassuming glass of water on your table a silent assailant?

  • PFAS: A legal labyrinth

Beyond the realm of health, the shadow of PFAS looms large in courtrooms. Thousands of lawsuits have been filed, alleging industries knowingly released these harmful chemicals into the environment. Notably, DuPont and its spin-off firm Chemours were embroiled in a $671 million settlement. Yet, this could be just the beginning of a legal quagmire.

  • The human stories: The unspoken casualties of the PFAS crisis

Behind the statistics and the lawsuits, there are human faces bearing the brunt of this crisis. Like Sue Bailey, whose son's birth defects she believes are linked to PFAS exposure. Or Bucky Bailey, born with facial deformities, his mother a former DuPont plant employee. These stories bring to light the potentially devastating impacts of PFAS exposure.

  • Mapping the road to a PFAS-free future

Despite the ominous overtones, the future isn't completely bleak. Strides are being made towards a PFAS-free future. Legislative action, stringent oversight, technological innovation, and public awareness are the weapons we need in this battle. From the EPA's PFAS Innovative Treatment Team working on scalable solutions to researchers striving to breakdown PFAS, the road to clean, safe water isn't unattainable.

Our fight against PFAS is akin to a game of chess against an invisible opponent. But, armed with knowledge and driven by a relentless pursuit of justice, we can strive for a future where clean water isn't a rare commodity, but a basic right. All it takes is for us to question, to challenge, and to act. After all, isn't that what ensures our survival?

Read more here

Title: The Silent Threat: Uncovering the Deadly Connection Between 'Forever Chemicals' and Testicular Cancer in the Military

I. Unraveling the Silent Threat: The Perilous Link Between PFAS and Testicular Cancer

In the shadowed corners of military service, a silent threat looms – the alarming connection between 'forever chemicals' and testicular cancer. A groundbreaking federal study has shed light on this deadly association, unveiling the stealthy assailant – PFOS, a subtype of PFAS chemical – found prevalent in the bloodstreams of military personnel. As per the study conducted by the National Cancer Institute and Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences, a compelling correlation between PFAS chemicals and testicular cancer has surfaced. The research discovered elevated levels of PFAS in the bloodstream of Air Force firefighters and weaker evidence of PFAS exposure among those residing in places with high PFAS levels in drinking water. These findings underscore the gravity of the situation and the imperative of addressing the silent threat of PFAS contamination.

II. The Invisible Killers: Understanding the Role of PFAS in the Environment and Our Bodies

PFAS, primarily consisting of chemicals like PFOA and PFOS, have earned the moniker of 'forever chemicals’ due to their long-lasting nature. They do not break down in the environment and can accumulate over time in the human body. Understanding the omnipresence of these chemicals in everyday consumer goods, including firefighting foam, nonstick cookware, and water-repellent clothing, is crucial for realizing the magnitude of exposure and its potential health risks.

III. Sounding the Alarm: Higher Rates of Testicular Cancer Among Civilian and Military Firefighters

Multiple studies have indicated a higher prevalence of testicular cancer among firefighting personnel. The correlation is often attributed to the presence of PFAS in firefighting foam, thereby highlighting the occupational hazards faced by these brave people. The Department of Defense has a deadline till October 2024 to cease the use of all PFAS-containing foams. The clock is ticking, and the need to accelerate the pace of action is paramount.

IV. The Slow Response: The Military's Handling of PFAS Contamination and Its Consequences

Despite the looming deadline, the military's response to PFAS contamination has been slow. Their sluggishness in addressing the contamination and halting the use of PFAS-containing firefighting foam has raised questions and concerns. This slow response could potentially put both military personnel and surrounding communities at risk, thereby making the need for a more proactive approach a matter of urgency.

V. Taking Action: The Future of Legislation, Research, and Initiatives Against PFAS Exposure

Congress has responded to the PFAS crisis by introducing legislation aimed at addressing exposure. These measures include requirements for the Department of Veterans Affairs to treat conditions linked to exposure and provide disability benefits for those affected. However, there is always room for more action. Further research into the health effects of PFAS exposure and increased scrutiny and screening for military personnel and communities with high exposure levels are necessary. The silent threat of 'forever chemicals' now revealed demands immediate and comprehensive action—our future, and especially the future of our military personnel, is at stake.

The Silent Killer in Your Faucet: Unveiling how PFAS Contamination Morphed Unsuspecting Citizens into Victims of the Biggest Mass Tort

Dive into a world where miracles of modern chemistry become the harbingers of a health crisis. Our story unfurls with PFAS, chemicals once deemed marvels for their heat resistance and water repellence. But do these 'miracle' substances hold a darker secret?

Silently, PFAS seeped into our lives, in non-stick pans, waterproof clothes, and even firefighting foam. Yet, as their benefits shone bright, their destructive potential stayed hidden, left unexamined.

PFAS – the 'Forever Chemicals' – don't just disappear. They persist, in our environment and bodies, with devastating effects:

The invasion of PFAS in our lives is eerily reminiscent of subliminal advertising. We are lured by their benefits, only to find ourselves ensnared in a health crisis we never signed up for. Could this be a product of behavioral economics at play, where the immediate benefits overshadow the long-term costs?

There's something unsettling about the invisibility of this threat. It's like trying to trace a silent algorithm in machine learning, quietly influencing outcomes without us realizing. This begs the question: How can we fight an enemy we can't see?

But our story doesn't end in defeat. The human spirit is resilient, and as the PFAS crisis unfolds, we see the rise of an unprecedented legal backlash. Victims turn to mass tort litigation to restore justice:

Like a story out of consumer neuroscience, the PFAS crisis calls us to question the decisions we make and the products we trust. How much influence do these invisible factors hold over our choices?

Yet, there's hope on the horizon. Measures are in place to mitigate this threat and turn the tide:

Research is underway to find safer alternatives. Innovative technologies promise to break down PFAS. Advocacy groups demand a comprehensive PFAS ban. Our future may not be set in stone, but it is within our grasp.

Our journey with PFAS is a stark reminder of how scientific advancement can sometimes bear unintended consequences. It's a call to action for everyone – manufacturers, regulators, consumers – to ensure history doesn't repeat itself. As we unmask the silent killer lurking in our faucets, we reclaim our right to clean, safe water.

The challenge is formidable, but together, we can turn the tide.

Read more here

Unmasking Justice: How Lawsuit Help Desk Empowers Victims to Claim Their Right to Compensation

Navigating the legal labyrinth after an alleged pharmaceutical mishap, a faulty medical device, or environmental pollution can feel like an uphill battle. Yet, the Lawsuit Help Desk emerges as a beacon in the fog, with a noble mission to empower victims and restore justice.

This is not just about linking victims with lawyers. It's about breaking down barriers and facilitating access to justice, regardless of where the victims are located in the United States. It's about making justice accessible and manageable for people who have been allegedly wronged.

In an economic climate where legal proceedings can often be financially draining, Lawsuit Help Desk commits to a 100% contingent fee structure.

Its contingent fee model also serves as a powerful motivator for attorneys, urging them to work diligently for their clients to secure the best possible outcome.

Moreover, Lawsuit Help Desk actively promotes accountability among manufacturers. Through litigation, they shine a spotlight on alleged wrongdoings by manufacturers, laying the groundwork for potential settlements or verdicts.

Lawsuit Help Desk goes beyond just advocacy. It empowers victims to take the driver's seat in their own legal journey.

Lawsuit Help Desk is, at its core, a champion of individuals.

In a world where corporations often overshadow individuals, Lawsuit Help Desk is the rare platform that puts victims first. By connecting victims with top law firms, advocating for justice, empowering victims, and holding alleged culprits accountable, Lawsuit Help Desk is a testament to the power of collective action in the pursuit of justice.

Read more here

Unmasking the Silent Killer: The Shocking Truth about Firefighter Gear and the Deadly PFAS Exposure

Unveiling a Silent Threat: The Profound Impact of PFAS on Firefighters

Not all battles are fought in the open. Firefighters, our frontline heroes, face a silent yet persistent enemy on the battleground – Perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances, known as PFAS. Known as 'forever chemicals' for their enduring presence, these synthetic marvels are found in everyday products such as non-stick pans, water-repellent clothing, and stain-resistant fabrics. Their usefulness is dual-edged; while they offer heat, oil, and water resistance, they pose potential dangers when used in firefighting equipment.

On the hidden battlefield, PFAS exposure raises significant health concerns:

The fight against PFAS extends beyond the firefighting scene into courtrooms. Manufacturers like 3M, DuPont, and Chemguard face allegations of knowingly using PFAS in turnout gear and failing to inform users about potential health risks. Legal recognition of these claims could lead to a paradigm shift in manufacturer liability.

Hope, however, flickers in the face of adversity. Efforts are underway to ensure a safer firefighting future:

Firefighters' courage mirrors their resolution to fight for a safer future. As the battle against this invisible enemy intensifies, the resolve of our heroes only strengthens. The fight continues, not just against the flames but for justice and safety. The true test of bravery lies not only in facing the fire but in challenging the invisible threats lurking within our very defense mechanisms.

Read more here

The Silent Killer in Your Faucet: Unveiling how PFAS Contamination Morphed Unsuspecting Citizens into Victims of the Biggest Mass Tort

Unmasking a silent threat that lurks in our faucets, this exposition delves into the murky depths of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS). Once viewed as a marvel of modern chemistry, these substances are now allegedly causing a health crisis of epic proportions.

PFAS, a class of man-made chemicals celebrated for their heat resistance, water repellence, and durability, have found their way into myriad consumer products. From non-stick cookware and waterproof apparel to firefighting foam, their presence is ubiquitous. But, have we under-considered their potential harm?

These substances are now linked to numerous health issues, for instance:

The stealthy invasion of PFAS into our water supplies is as alarming as it is elusive. These trespassers not only originate from industrial sites or firefighting foam but can also seep into groundwater from landfills and treated sewage sludge. Some stark statistics reveal:

Our everyday heroes – firefighters, mothers, factory workers – are unwittingly becoming victims of this hidden menace. Firefighters, who once used PFAS-containing foam to extinguish flames, now allegedly battle cancer due to PFAS exposure. Communities near manufacturing plants report spikes in birth defects and rare cancers. Families unknowingly consuming contaminated water or food prepared in PFAS-coated cookware may face a lifetime of health challenges.

This crisis has sparked massive legal fallout, with PFAS at the center of some of the largest mass tort litigation in history. Numerous lawsuits have been filed against PFAS manufacturers, with plaintiffs alleging that companies knowingly concealed the dangers of these chemicals. Major settlements have already been reached, with companies compelled to compensate victims and fund medical studies.

However, this bleak landscape is not entirely devoid of hope. Efforts are being made to combat PFAS contamination:

Simultaneously, safer alternatives to PFAS chemicals are being researched, and innovative technologies that can effectively breakdown PFAS in the environment are emerging. Advocacy groups are pushing for policy changes, including a comprehensive PFAS ban.

This crisis highlights the need for a collective response. By learning from our past and taking strategic action, we can mitigate the effects of PFAS pollution and steer our future towards a safer, healthier world.

In this tale of scientific advancement and its unintended consequences, one thing becomes clear: we must unmask the silent killer in our faucets to reclaim our right to clean, safe water. As we continue to battle the PFAS menace, the fight for justice and accountability remains paramount.

Read more here

PAID ATTORNEY ADVERTISEMENT: This Website is a group advertisement. It is not a lawyer referral service. is owned and operated by Awon Holdings LLC and is not a law firm. We connect people to legal service and there is no charge to be connected with an attorney. You are under no obligation to retain any services of those connected through our website. We try our best to keep things fair and balanced to help you make the best choice for you. This information does not constitute legal or medical advice and it should not be relied upon as such. Results are not guaranteed and past performance is not an indication of future success. Always consult with your doctor before modifying your medication or regular medical regimen.

Copyright © 2023 - All Rights Reserved