AFFF Lawsuits: Firefighter Foam Lawsuit (November 2024 Update)

The first trial addressing water source contamination involving telomerization is set for March 3, 2025. Telomer Water Provider cases were excluded from the mass settlement involving 3M and other defendants last year because of the process used to reduce the levels of PFAS in the AFFF that contaminated the water. Once these cases are resolved by trial or settlement, we expect the focus will turn to personal injury claims brought by firefighters and military members who were directly exposed to AFFF.

Because not all witnesses have been deposed for the Tier Two trials which have yet to be scheduled, the court is allowing both sides the opportunity to add witnesses to their trial lists. The other side can then ask for a deposition within 14 days of receiving the amended list.

More AFFF claims are joining the MDL, including a lawsuit filed by another former firefighter. This plaintiff claims he was exposed to AFFF not only while training as a firefighter but also by consuming contaminated water in Virginia. The defendants in this case include DuPont, 3M, and Chemours.

Although 300 cases were dismissed, 500 new cases were added to the AFFF MDL in August. This is not unusual, especially as claims are settled out of court. As of the end of August, 9,576 cases are pending in this multidistrict litigation.

We expect the pace will pick up in September after the next status conference on the 13th, where we'll learn more about the first bellwether trial or the possibility of a global settlement. The LLN team is still optimistic that the AFFF defendants will try to settle these matters rather than risk a risky and potentially expensive trial verdict.

A team at the University of Arizona studied a town in Washington State and found proof that several decades of AFFF use at a nearby military base has significantly contaminated the nearby water sources. Unfortunately, many people who lived near the base showed high levels of PFAS chemicals in their blood. This research may help support the plaintiffs' positions in the pending litigation.

We are beginning to see a new wave of television and radio commercials targeting individuals diagnosed with cancer following exposure to AFFF firefighting foam. Further, digital marketing in the form of pay-per-click advertisements has picked up for the third month in a row. There has been significant scuttle among AFFF lawyers regarding a potential settlement concerning several cancers and diseases.

• Thyroid Cancer
• Testicular Cancer
• Liver Cancer
• Kidney Cancer
• Thyroid Disease
• Ulcerative Colitis

With individual firefighter bellwether trials coming up, defendants such as 3M, Dupont, and Chemguard face significant pressure to resolve their cases and reduce their financial exposure.

Massachusetts is about to instate a new law that will ban the use of PFAS in firefighting protective clothing and equipment. The ban has already passed the state senate and is now pending approval by the state house of representatives. If the law is enacted, all firefighting gear containing PFAS will be prohibited in the state by 2027. This will by no means solve the issues related to firefighting foam, but it is a huge step toward preventing all firefighters from being exposed to PFAS every day through their gear.

Tyco Fire Products has reached a preliminary settlement with its primary insurers, including AIG, in a dispute over their responsibility for covering illnesses related to PFAS exposure from AFFF. Once this agreement is finalized, Tyco will dismiss AIG from the litigation with prejudice in exchange for a financial settlement.

This preliminary settlement between Tyco and its insurers will be advantageous for victims of AFFF since it will strengthen Tyco’s financial position to pay its $750 million settlement with drinking water systems. It also positions Tyco to contribute significantly to a wider global AFFF firefighting foam settlement in the future.

In the past several weeks, we've seen many court notices that plaintiffs in the AFFF multidistrict litigation are voluntarily dismissing their pending cases. These dismissals could be an indication that the cases have settled, but since the terms are usually confidential, we can't be sure. As always, the LLN team is keeping a close eye on all of the developments in this AFFF MDL.

Judge Richard Gergel of the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina has selected nine initial bellwether cases from a list provided by the plaintiffs. These nine cases are comprised of individual firefighter claims associated with kidney cancer, testicular cancer, thyroid cancer, or ulcerative colitis. Further, Judge Gergel felt these nine cases were better representative of the plaintiffs in the AFFF foam lawsuit than the eleven cases the defense proposed.

This is a huge development in AFFF litigation as cases have actually been selected for trial. A bellwether trial will enable both plaintiffs and manufacturer defendants to see how an actual jury will weigh the scientific evidence demonstrating exposure to firefighting foam is causally related to specific cancers and diseases.

There is a body of scientific literature illustrating exposure to PFAS has been tied to an increased risk of kidney and testicular cancer along with thyroid cancer. Many military and airport firefighters trained regularly with aqueous film forming foam (AFFF) over many years, leading to significant occupational exposure to PFAS chemicals.

We believe the scientific evidence is both compelling and persuasive.

These individual firefighter cancer claims present significant exposure to deep-pocketed defendants such as Dupont, 3M, Chevron, and Chemours. It is our expectation that average jury verdicts in toxic firefighting foam lawsuits will exceed $2.5 million. This will drive up the average settlement range.

Keep in mind that the aggregate number of cases throughout the United States brings down the average settlement value. However, we expect AFFF firefighting foam cases to ultimately resolve at approximately $175,000.00 to $325,000.00. Having bellwether cases selected will force the defendants to make an effort to limit their exposure by resolving all cases.

We believe the AFFF lawsuit has a strong potential to be fully resolved during the first half of 2025.

A new PFAS study specifically examined how a number of different types of PFAS can enter the human body. Researchers analyzed the mechanism of absorption by utilizing human skin models. This study will shed light on the cumulative exposure of AFFF firefighting foam and how it ultimately enters the human body.

We are well aware that firefighters face cumulative exposure to AFFF firefighting foam which had long been theorized to enter the body based on skin contact. We now have direct proof and a causal link between dermal exposure to AFFF and certain cancers and diseases. 

The number of ongoing AFFF firefighting foam-related legal actions has steadily increased, climbing from 8,270 in June to 9,198 by July 2, 2024. Among the recently filed cases is a notable lawsuit from a Kentucky resident who claims to have suffered severe health complications, specifically thyroid disease, attributed to AFFF exposure.

This particular plaintiff, who has served as both a volunteer and contract firefighter since 2015, asserts that his thyroid condition, accompanied by considerable physical discomfort and emotional trauma, is a direct result of his contact with these products.

His exposure to AFFF firefighting foam occurred during his service at multiple fire departments, including the Greater Naples Fire Rescue, Caneyville Volunteer Fire Department, and Irvington Fire Department.

The legal filing emphasizes the widely recognized connection between PFAS-containing AFFF products and thyroid cancer, underscoring the serious health risks associated with these firefighting foams.

This case adds to the growing body of evidence linking AFFF firefighting foam exposure to various health issues, particularly among firefighters and other first responders who have had prolonged contact with these substances in the line of duty.

Over 8400 AFFF firefighting foam lawsuits are now pending in the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina. This is now the fastest-growing mass tort in the United States, and we believe the AFFF MDL will continue growing due to the strength of scientific causation and the lack of other exciting consolidated lawsuits. 

The science illustrating the causation between the use of PFAS-containing firefighting foams and diseases such as kidney cancer and testicular cancer is extremely strong. The scientific evidence illustrating causation between those exposed to AFFF firefighting foam and liver cancer or thyroid cancer is also relatively strong. 

We believe firefighting foam cancer lawsuits on the four aforementioned cancers will surpass the Daubert scientific standard, and bellwether trials will proceed by next spring. Thus, we believe an AFFF lawsuit settlement is on the near horizon.

Regarding the aforementioned diseases referenced, it is unlikely that the defendant manufacturers will allow individual AFFF cancer cases to proceed to trial. 

A broad set of legislation signed by President Biden and backed by the IAFF and the Federal Aviation Administration introduces a series of significant grants to remove AFFF from use at airports and replace such with safer firefighting foams that do not contain so-called "forever chemicals." 

Most AFFF plaintiff lawyers are now focusing their efforts on preparing personal injury cases focused on these six medical conditions:

• Kidney cancer
• Thyroid cancer
• Testicular cancer
• Liver cancer
• Thyroid disease and hypothyroidism
• Ulcerative colitis

The LLN team expects plaintiffs suffering from one or more of these conditions will be chosen as the first bellwether trials (test cases) in this MDL.

With the addition of more than 250 new cases in May, the current number of pending AFFF lawsuits is now 8,270.

The last Case Management Order requires both sides to create a process for selecting the first bellwether trials regarding personal injuries or wrongful death claims. The goal is to choose and manage a pool of 25 lawsuits focused on four medical conditions:

• Kidney cancer
• Thyroid disease
• Testicular cancer
• Ulcerative colitis

The proposed schedule outlines various events and sets deadlines for two groups of cases. Dates are set for Tier 1 discovery, disclosure of experts and their deposition deadlines, expected motion filings, and response cut-offs. and more.

While both sides to this litigation are working on Tier 1 cases, they are also required to propose a Case Management Order for Tier 2 cases to keep those claims moving as well. Tier 1 lawsuits involve plaintiffs who suffer from kidney cancer, testicular cancer, hypothyroidism, thyroid disease, or ulcerative colitis related to AFFF exposure.

In an effort to reach an agreement about the conditions that will apply to Tier 2 claims, the parties requested 15 additional days to submit the order. Hopefully, the new order will guide the court's process in determining and hearing Tier 2 bellwether trials. This short deadline extension should not affect the overall progress of these cases or any other planned milestones.

In the meantime, 323 new personal injury lawsuits joined the AFFF MDL in April, pushing the total number of pending cases over 8,000.

The Metropolitan Water District of Southern California has filed an appeal with the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals. This is an appeal of the $1.185 billion settlement that was approved by the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina in December of 2023. In response, plaintiffs have filed a pleading stating that when the Water District opted out of the Dupont settlement in December, they waived their right to appeal. Keep in mind the appeal will not impact the claims brought by individual firefighters. 

In the past 30 days, 568 new cases joined the pending AFFF multidistrict litigation, bringing the total number of pending personal injury cases related to AFFF exposure to 7,738.

While the court is focusing on the scientific evidence linking AFFF to certain types of cancer, Judge Gergel also wants both sides of the litigation to propose a procedure for choosing which cases should be considered for bellwether trials.

In MDL situations, certain cases (known as bellwether trials) can be chosen as "test trials" to see how a jury will decide the case based on the evidence provided. A bellwether trial can often lead to an overall settlement or other resolutions. Under the current court schedule, we don't expect any AFFF trials in 2024.

The lawyers on the plaintiffs' steering committee in the AFFF lawsuit are focusing on providing the defense with as much epidemiological evidence as possible on liver cancer and thyroid cancer.

Per Judge Gergel's recent case management order, the plaintiffs have until April 15 to disclose all peer-reviewed data and published studies. The defense then has until May 1 to reveal their scientific studies to the plaintiffs. 

We believe hundreds of new AFFF firefighting foam lawsuits will be filed into the MDL based on the strength of science illustrating the link between AFFF exposure and liver cancer and thyroid cancer.

If you have received a cancer diagnosis after AFFF exposure, we can request and review your medical records immediately to verify your compensation eligibility.

However, we feel very confident that if you were exposed to AFFF for a prolonged period, those chemicals could lead to liver and thyroid cancer diagnoses. 

CMO #28 requires the plaintiffs to disclose all relevant peer-reviewed data and published studies to the defendants linking exposure to AFFF firefighting foam to liver cancer and thyroid cancer. 

In turn, the defendants have until May 1 to turn over to plaintiffs all relevant data and peer-reviewed published studies or articles demonstrating the lack of a link between liver cancer or thyroid cancer and firefighting foam exposure. 

Both parties are to jointly submit all relevant data and peer-reviewed published studies to the Court so Judge Gergel may efficiently review them. The Court will then schedule a science day in the AFFF firefighting foam MDL. Science Day is traditionally a non-adversarial proceeding. Experts are presented to the Court, but they are not subject to cross-examination. In fact, the Judge actually questions the witnesses with the purpose of learning more about the science and possible causal link or lack thereof. 

Lawyers for both sides of the pending AFFF lawsuit are expected to appear today before Judge Gergel to report on the MDL's current status. While we remain optimistic about settlement negotiations in 2024, we should learn more after today.

In the meantime, another new AFFF lawsuit was added to the MDL. The case was originally filed in Nevada by a certified firefighter who was exposed to Aqueous Film-Forming Foam over a five-year period. He filed his lawsuit after being diagnosed with bladder cancer in 2021.

To focus on settlement discussions without worrying about the statute of limitations deadlines, BASF and nine plaintiffs have agreed to toll (suspend and/or extend) filing deadlines while the parties attempt to resolve the cases. If these cases don't settle, the plaintiffs will be allowed to file their lawsuits even if their filing deadlines have passed.

Other defendants, including 3M, Tyco Fire Products, and Chemguard, are trying to add another lawsuit to the AFFF Multidistrict Litigation (MDL). The Connecticut attorney general filed that case and seeks a judgment limiting the use of PFAS chemicals. This is not a personal injury lawsuit and, in our opinion, does not belong in the pending MDL. The MDL should focus on compensating the people who were injured by AFFF exposure and work to resolve those claims in 2024.

Although the next MDL court date is not scheduled until March 1st, many plaintiff's lawyers remain optimistic that a settlement could still happen this year. With an additional 279 AFFF firefighting foam injury cases filed in January, nearly 7,000 plaintiffs are waiting for a legal remedy. It's not too late to join the MDL and join other injured firefighters and service members who deserve a reasonable settlement.

Judge Gergel recently praised the settlement proposed by 3M Co. that eventually resolved all pending public water contamination cases and helped almost 12,000 public water systems remove PFAS contamination. Meanwhile, all parties remain concerned about the possibility that 3M could file for bankruptcy protection under the weight of the pending PFAS cases. We expect 3M to threaten to file bankruptcy during settlement negotiations regarding the pending AFFF personal injury and wrongful death claims.

Although 3M's value has dropped by 80 percent since 2018, it still has an estimated value of $50 billion, which could certainly help compensate many injured military members and firefighters exposed to AFFF.

Washington has recently announced an AFFF collection and remediation campaign to eradicate stockpiles of the hazardous substance in municipal fire stations across the state. The Department of Ecology intends to begin the drive upon the conclusion of a period of public comment and reevaluation. 

Washington’s efforts parallel those of New Hampshire, whose novel contract with Revive Environmental was one of the first major attempts to treat AFFF supplies, which pose chronic risks to the environment and human health. 

Following the resolution of a discovery dispute later this month, Judge Gergel has ordered the parties involved in the current AFFF MDL to initiate evidentiary collection for a list of court-approved, prospective bellwether trials. The suits are the first AFFF personal injury cases to advance in the aftermath of a contentious series of proceedings over the legitimacy of 3M and DuPont’s settlements with municipal water suppliers. It remains to be seen how major defendants will respond. For example, 3M averted a bellwether trial for the City of Stuart, Florida, days before it was scheduled to take place in order to finalize a settlement.

Hawaii became the latest state to seek accountability and damages from high-profile AFFF manufacturers and contributors to PFAS contamination. Their December court filing condemns the deceptive marketing practices of such companies as 3M and DuPont, which knowingly sold toxic firefighting foams, and charges them with “failure to warn” and “public nuisance.” 

The state seeks compensation from the producers for a series of ongoing investigations and remediation campaigns that have cost it millions over the past several years.

The AFFF Lawsuit might be the fastest-growing mass tort at this juncture. Both sides are currently facing a January 31, 2024, deadline to resolve disputed discovery issues, including a motion to compel. With advertising for Camp Lejeune claims slowing to a crawl, there has been a noticeable increase in advertising for the firefighter foam lawsuit.

With the conclusion of the municipal AFFF multidistrict litigation, Judge Gergel is getting ready to address the more than 6,600 personal injury cases participating in the MDL. In an early December case management order (CMO), the court ordered the prosecution to devise a list of plaintiffs for the bellwether trial process.

On December 12th, the plaintiffs submitted a list of 25 litigants suffering from kidney cancer, testicular cancer, hypothyroidism or thyroid disease, and/or ulcerative colitis. Typically, in MDLs, a bellwether case is remanded to the court where it was originally filed for trial. However, the Supreme Court Decision Lexecon v. Milberg Weiss permits plaintiffs to waive that right and have their case set for trial in the MDL transfer court. 

The 25 plaintiffs selected for the bellwether process waived their Lexecon rights so the U.S. District Court for the District of South Carolina could hear and resolve their claims. At the same time, the plaintiffs drew Judge Gergel’s attention to a recent ruling in the United States Bankruptcy Court. 

A formerly prominent defendant in the AFFF lawsuits, Kidde-Fenwal Incorporated (KFI) appealed to the Delaware Bankruptcy Court after running the risk of insolvency linked to the costs of litigation. After contentious proceedings, the court halted any AFFF-related charges or claims against KFI or its affiliates until January 5, 2024.

The U.S. District Court for the District of South Carolina is slated to hold a fairness hearing for the $1.18 billion DuPont settlement in the AFFF multidistrict litigation on December 14. Alongside a $10.3 billion settlement from 3M, the agreement tentatively concluded the first round of lawsuits addressing the complaints of municipal water suppliers. 

Upon the announcement of the settlement agreements in June 2023, several states, cities, and towns objected to the terms and payout figures. They asserted that the funds were insufficient to cover the costs of remediation campaigns and that the terms of the agreements were too narrow. 

Over the past thirty (30) days, 351 new lawsuits have been filed in the AFFF firefighting foam MDL in the United States District Court in the District of South Carolina. There are presently over 6400 AFFF firefighting foam lawsuits that have been filed into the MDL, which commenced approximately three years ago. A portion of these lawsuits were municipal water contamination lawsuits due to PFAS chemicals. In other words, these were lawsuits filed on behalf of cities and towns impacted by water contamination due to the presence of forever chemicals such as PFAS that have been found in water systems.

The vast majority of filings were AFFF cancer lawsuits filed by individuals who were diagnosed with several types of cancers due to firefighting foam products.

We may soon learn when the first bellwether afff trial will take place. A new case management order in the AFFF firefighting form MDL requires the plaintiff steering committee (PSC) and lead defense counsel to each submit a list of cases to serve as potential bellwether trials. The selected cases will then proceed to Discovery before a final list of bellwether cases is selected.

A new study links testicular cancer to Firefighting foam among U.S. Air Force members. This is the first study to test actual blood samples. Researchers were able to causally link elevated levels of PFAS exposure to testicular cancer. There is a strong causal link that exposure to AFFF significantly increases the risk of testicular cancer. 

As predicted, 3M, Dupont, and other manufacturers of AFFF firefighting foam agreed to pay $10.3 Billion to globally resolve PFAS contamination/municipal water contamination claims. Members of the plaintiff's steering committee (PSC) and lead defense counsel have been focused on municipal water contamination cases involving PFAS chemicals over the past six months. We believe both plaintiff and defense lawyers will now focus on the individual firefighter cancer lawsuits. There are a significant number of testicular cancer and kidney cancer cases in the AFFF firefighting foam MDL. 

Judge Richard Gergel asked the plaintiff's counsel for up-to-date information concerning scientific studies linking exposure to AFFF firefighting foam and various health risks. Plaintiff lawyers responded by submitting a recent press release from the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). The EPA states there is no acceptable level of exposure to "forever chemicals" such as PFAS, which is an active toxic substance in AFFF. 

Potential Global Settlement in the Municipal Water Contamination Lawsuits

We are also getting closer to a global settlement on the municipal water contamination cases. In turn, this will be a phenomenal development for the individual exposure cases as a global settlement shall serve as a precedent for future resolutions. At a minimum, it illustrates the willingness of defendants such as 3M, Chevron, Dupont, and Chemguard to resolve PFAS contamination claims and retire their corporate financial exposure. Firefighting foam lawyers will use a global settlement as leverage to accomplish a similar settlement of all individual claims. Another recent study illustrates a strong causal link between AFFF firefighting foam and prostate cancer. 

Over 480 AFFF cancer lawsuits were filed into the firefighting foam MDL in June. There are now 5,000 pending AFFF cases in the MDL. Further, we are seeing many more commercials from plaintiff lawyers seeking toxic firefighting foam cancer cases. Thus, we expect the class of plaintiffs to grow substantially over the coming months. More prospective clients are learning they may qualify to file an AFFF lawsuit.

Keep in mind that municipality claims make up only a portion of the AFFF firefighting foam lawsuit. The vast majority of claims in the AFFF class action lawsuit are related to individual firefighter injury cases. The claims we are presently pursuing include thyroid cancer, testicular cancer, thyroid disease, and ulcerative colitis.

We believe that a resolution of the municipality claims will result in fast-tracking the personal injury claims in the AFFF MDL. Our AFFF lawyers believe a settlement in individual firefighting foam cancer lawsuits could be less than two years away at this juncture.

A settlement in the municipality water contamination lawsuits clears the way for individual firefighter claimants. Defense lawyers representing Chemguard, 3M, and Dupont will be able to devote their focus to this category of claims going forward.

Several manufacturers, such as Dupont and 3M, have entered into a global settlement to resolve all of their municipal water contamination lawsuits. Dupont and its spin-off "Chemours Co." have agreed to pay $1.18 Billion to settle 300 PFAS contamination lawsuits. 

3M (the largest defendant) agreed to pay $10.3 Billion to resolve their drinking water contamination claims and remediation of PFAS chemicals in drinking water sources. PFAS chemicals have been absorbed into the water aquifers and these forever chemicals are incredibly difficult to remove/remediate. There are presently over one hundred PFAS contamination sites throughout the United States. While this may not directly impact your AFFF cancer lawsuit, the indirect benefit is the willingness of large defendant manufacturers to resolve all claims.

Note* These settlements do not apply to all AFFF lawsuits.

The plaintiff's steering committee and defendant manufacturer 3M filed a joint motion to delay the first AFFF lawsuit jury trial, which was slated to start today. The parties stated in a one-page motion that they are negotiating to resolve a large chunk of municipality claims related to water contamination filed by cities and towns throughout the nation.

The nation's first AFFF water contamination lawsuit was scheduled to begin today with the City of Stuart, Florida, as the plaintiff. This trial has been indefinitely delayed based on a strong likelihood that defendants such as 3M may be close to entering into a global settlement. This is good news for individual AFFF firefighting foam lawsuits, as defendant manufacturers will begin focusing on resolving individual claims once their municipal claims have been resolved. 

Over 300 AFFF firefighting foam lawsuits were filed into the MDL in May. This is a fast-growing mass tort. 

The Chemours Company, Corteva, and Dupont de Numours have agreed to create a $1.185 billion fund to address water contamination caused by AFFF firefighting foam. The settlement fund is pending approval from Judge Gergel in the United States District Court (Federal Court for the District of South Carolina). Further, this fund will address the remediation of existing water contamination at numerous sites identified by the EPA.

The first AFFF firefighting foam lawsuit slated to be tried before a jury is scheduled for June 5, 2023. The plaintiff is the city of Stuart, Florida, which has been successful in convincing Judge Gergel to ensure the jury will hear about the EPA's proposed limits for PFAS in drinking water. This will serve as evidence for a jury to consider when examining whether 3M knowingly contaminated the drinking water in Stuart, Florida. 

3M has argued that the EPA's proposed limits are provisional in nature and fail to reflect what they knew when AFFF firefighting foam was produced and used at the site. 

The Environmental Working Group has estimated it will cost nearly $30 billion to clean up at least 50 contaminated military bases and drinking water. There is a strong belief that many of the military bases have led to contaminated drinking water on surrounding lands.

The first firefighting foam lawsuit trial scheduled in the AFFF MDL is set for June 5, 2023 (City of Stuart Florida v. 3M Co., et al.). The city of Stuart alleges that defendants such as 3M and Dupont produced and distributed AFFF firefighting foam containing PFAS that made its way into the drinking water. In turn, the PFAS contaminated the city's drinking water and will cost hundreds of millions at a minimum to remediate.

3M and Dupont claim the plaintiffs have not demonstrated any proof their products are what have contaminated the drinking water, resulting in many personal injury cases.

There were 123 Firefighting foam lawsuits filed in the AFFF MDL consolidated in the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina. There are now 4218 pending AFFF lawsuits, and they are growing quickly by the day. We believe the following four cancers are causally linked to prolonged exposure to firefighting foam;

• Liver Cancer
• Kidney Cancer
• Testicular Cancer
• Thyroid Cancer

Firefighters are strongly encouraged to enroll in the registry. The National Firefighter Registry tracks the rate and patterns of cancer among firefighters and compares it to local cancer registries around the nation. Firefighters have a disproportionately high rate of cancer compared to the traditional population. 

The Registry is mandated by the Firefighter Cancer Registry Act with the overarching goal of curbing the rates of cancer among firefighters.

Let's start with some background information to explain how AFFF can harm individuals who come in contact with this product. In order to make AFFF foamy and give it its trademark film that smothers fires, AFFF manufacturers utilize per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS).

PFAS are a controversial set of chemicals that have come under immense scrutiny due to their connection with an increased risk of cancer and their durability and longevity, which makes them an ongoing serious environmental and public health problem. 

These chemicals have been used since the 1950s in a variety of applications, where their waterproof and durable characteristics have been very useful. PFAS can be found in a wide range of products, including solvents, food packaging, clothing, and furniture.

PFAS are manmade fluoropolymers that resist heat, oil, grease, and water. These attributes are useful in many circumstances, but the usefulness is offset by the fact that these chemicals take an extremely long time to break down in the environment. Known as "forever chemicals," PFAS can seep into soil and contaminate water sources and can accumulate in the bodies of wildlife and people who are exposed to or drink the toxic water. 

Because these chemicals can easily find their way into food and water supplies, they are extremely dangerous. PFAS can accumulate in human bodies over time and can cause significant damage that can affect organ functions and lead to cancer. 

These medical conditions can lead to extensive medical costs, the need for long-term care, and substantial changes in the affected person's lifestyle. A dedicated AFFF lawsuit attorney at LLN can explain how to bring a legal claim to recover related expenses and losses after a diagnosis of AFFF-related cancer. If you think your medical issues are related to AFFF exposure, don't wait to reach out to Lawsuit Legal News to learn more about your right to compensation.

In October 2023, a large number of AFFF water contamination claims filed by local water authorities and municipalities were resolved in a global settlement agreement. 3M, DuPont, and the other defendants will reportedly pay $10.3 billion to resolve these claims as part of the settlement deal.

A few municipal claims, known as the Telomer Water Provider cases, were not included in the global settlement, and the court is now working to resolve those claims. Unfortunately, this means the court is not focusing on individual personal injury claims, and those cases will most likely continue into 2025.

Eligibility for the AFFF Cancer Lawsuit primarily involves veterans and individuals who may have come in contact with Aqueous Film-Forming Foams (AFFF) during their military service or in certain environments and have since developed health conditions or illnesses due to this exposure. You must have used AFFF regularly on the job after 1960, you must have a diagnosis that is related to PFAS exposure, and you must have been discharged from the military other than dishonorably.

Aqueous Film Forming Foam (AFFF) has proven to be a highly effective tool used for fire suppression. The primary way people come into contact with AFFF is through occupational exposure, although certain groups are also at risk of environmental exposure given their proximity to job sites where AFFF is used. The following people are the most likely to be impacted by exposure to AFFF:

• Firefighters: Fire stations across the U.S. have historically relied on AFFF to tame blazes in real-life emergencies and training exercises. Military firefighters also use AFFF for similar purposes. In both cases, they have frequent and considerable contact with the carcinogenic substance.
• Military Personnel: The military is one of the heaviest users of AFFF. Having AFFF on hand and training service members on how to use it is essential to safety given the number of flammable and explosive equipment found on military bases, but that also means many military personnel have been exposed to harmful levels of toxins through AFFF.
• Airport Workers: AFFF is a key element in most airports’ fire safety strategy, as fuel sources abound. However, airport employees who use AFFF to extinguish fires, as well as those who are nearby, have higher rates of exposure.
• Communities Near Military Bases and Airports: AFFF runoff can taint the local water supply, subjecting nearby residents to the harmful effects of its toxins.
• Workers in Industries Using AFFF: Industries that deal with explosive materials and highly flammable liquids often keep AFFF on hand in case a fire breaks out.

AFFF firefighting foam has undeniable benefits when it comes to an immediate safety concern, but in the long term, many believe that the hazardous chemicals it contains are not worth the risk. Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances, or PFAS as the chemicals are also known, have heat-resistant properties that allow AFFF to cool off a fire. 

PFAS have been dubbed “forever chemicals” because the human body takes a long time to process them once they have been absorbed. As PFAS build up in a person’s system, they can upset the body’s normal routines, leading to a number of serious health issues, such as cancer and chronic conditions like thyroid disease.

The U.S. military, private companies, and other groups have noted the threat AFFF poses to the public. Many sectors are phasing out AFFF and committing researchers to creating other PFAS-free fire extinguishers. While these efforts look promising for reducing AFFF exposure in the future, there is still the matter of compensating individuals who have already been harmed by the forever chemicals in AFFF firefighting foam.

States are taking swift action to transition to safer and more efficient alternatives. Twelve states, including California, Colorado, Connecticut, Hawaii, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Minnesota, New Hampshire, New York, Vermont, and Washington, have implemented bans on the use of all PFAS in firefighting foam, permitting only restricted exceptions.

The two most common forms of PFAS in firefighting foam are perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS) and perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA). Both have been linked to the increased risk of cancer and are considered toxic. Several companies have pledged to phase out the use of PFOS and PFOA, but they are far from completely abandoned. Even once the current use of these chemicals has ended, old PFOA and PFOS will continue to persist in the environment for a long time to come.

AFFF Toxicity Proven to Accumulate and Last For Years

The PFAS found in AFFF are the primary reason why firefighting foam is so hazardous to your health. PFAS can build up in a person’s body over time and remain without breaking down. Research is still ongoing to determine the full effects of PFAS on people’s health, but studies have concluded that PFAS are carcinogenic and also cause disruption of many organ functions. 

We know that any exposure to AFFF can be hazardous. However, incidental and isolated cases of exposure alone are usually not enough to cause cancer. Touching some AFFF foam alone will not immediately cause severe health issues, although it is highly recommended that people avoid any exposure to the substance if possible.

Cancer risks and other health issues become a strong concern after repeated exposure over a long period of time. This kind of danger usually happens as a result of working as a firefighter or serving in the military, where AFFF use is still a concern.

Two of the compounds in AFFF that are known carcinogens are perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) and perfluorooctanesulfonic acid (PFOS). They are part of the chemical group of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS). As human-made compounds, they do not occur in the natural environment. Some forms of PFAS can take over 1000 years to degrade. This long degradation period is why the actions we take today have such a huge effect on our future.

AFFF is primarily used by firefighters, so they are at the highest risk for dangerous levels of exposure. Firefighters, in general, are exposed to dangerous substances in the course of their work, and despite the use of protective equipment, it is likely that they will come into contact with AFFF on a regular basis.

Firefighters can come into contact with AFFF while directly applying it to a fire, while preparing it for use, during the cleanup of the area and their protective clothing, and even just handling equipment that has become covered in the substance. As we know, even small amounts of exposure over the course of a career can add up and have a significant health impact on these first responders.

Part of AFFF's function is to leave a film on the surfaces it contacts in order. This film works well not just to smother a flame but also to keep flammable surfaces from reigniting. This has posed a problem since its resilience and pervasiveness on everything it touches makes human exposure and eventual soil and water contamination more likely.

AFFF is most notably tied to an increase in cancer risk. The following are the most common types of cancer that have been linked to AFFF exposure. 

• Bladder cancer
• Kidney cancer
• Pancreatic cancer
• Testicular cancer
• Liver cancer
• Breast cancer
• Leukemia
• Lymphoma
• Ovarian cancer
• Prostate cancer

In addition to these various types of cancer, people with long-term exposure to AFFF are more likely to develop a number of other illnesses that include:

• Asthma
• Fertility issues
• Fetal and child developmental disorders
• High blood pressure
• Thyroid disease

Firefighting foam is a product that needlessly places firefighters at a high risk of developing severe health problems. Although firefighters understand they must work with a number of dangerous materials to perform their jobs, they have the right to know all potential risks to make the best decisions.

However, when the chemical manufacturers and distributors fail to fully disclose the potential health risks associated with normal AFFF use, their negligence has caused widespread harm to the people in our country who have dedicated their lives to saving others. 

Firefighters, emergency responders, and military personnel who have been diagnosed with the listed cancers and illnesses associated with AFFF exposure are taking legal action to recover compensation for the damages they have suffered due to AFFF exposure. 

Thousands of product liability lawsuits have been filed against 25 different companies, such as DuPont, 3m, Tyco, and Chemguard, that manufacture and sell AFFF products. The sheer number of federal lawsuits has led to the creation of a multidistrict litigation (MDL-2873) in South Carolina overseen by U.S. District Judge Richard M. Gergel. This MDL consolidates the many claims to make pretrial proceedings more efficient and consistent nationwide while also allowing the coordination of plaintiffs' attorneys and judicial rulings.

The manufacturers of AFFF have already resolved many of the municipal water contamination claims brought by various cities and towns as a result of the damage caused to the local aquifers by firefighting foam. In fact, the very first municipal water contamination case was set to be tried on June 13, 2023 (City of Stuart v. 3M Co.) and was postponed as a large portion of municipal cases were being resolved.

Those harmed by AFFF exposure usually suffer severe losses to their financial, physical, and even emotional quality of life. In a product liability lawsuit, financial losses caused by AFFF exposure are considered legal damages. The goal of product liability mass tort claims is to make injured plaintiffs whole by providing sufficient compensation from the responsible parties that caused the plaintiffs' damages, including adverse health effects and the costs associated with treating such. 

Allowable damages can involve tangible financial losses like medical bills, known as economic damages, or non-economic damages, such as pain and suffering and loss of quality of life, which do not have an easily attributable dollar value. An experienced product liability attorney can help you determine which damages you have suffered and place a value on your personal injury claim.

Some potential damages involved in these lawsuits include:

• Medical expenses - current and future
• Lost income - current and future
• Pain and suffering
• Lost earning ability
• Loss of enjoyment of life
• Permanent disability
• Loss of consortium and family relationships

Every state has created Statutes of Limitation that control how long an injured person can wait before filing a lawsuit to hold someone responsible for their injuries. The timeline that relates to your case will depend on many factors, including where you were injured, when you discovered your injuries, whether you can link them to prior AFFF exposure, and many other details. To ensure you don't miss your window of opportunity to bring a firefighting foam lawsuit, consult with one of the mass tort lawyers at LLN, who can help you calculate the limitation period that controls your potential legal action.

Because every person exposed to AFFF has a different experience and is facing different medical concerns, we can't say what your specific case is worth without learning more about you.

During a free consultation with one of the LLN team members, we can gather more information to help us estimate the potential value of your AFFF injury claim.

How Much Does a Mass Tort Lawyer Cost?

Don't let the fear of paying a lawyer keep you from contacting the LLN mass tort team. We offer free consultations to ensure all your questions are answered, and we don't get paid until we successfully resolve your injury claim. Since you won't have to pay anything upfront, you have nothing to lose. Don't risk your future. Reach out today.