Municipalities are filing distinct types of legal actions in the Aqueous Film-Forming Foams (AFFF) Products Liability Litigation MDL No. 2873. These legal actions all involve varied damage claims relating to PFAS chemicals. Generally, Plaintiffs claim that firefighting foams containing PFAS chemicals contaminated groundwater near various military bases, airports, and other industrial sites. This contamination damaged groundwater and other municipal property.
Plaintiffs Allege Damages Caused by PFAS Containing Foam
The plaintiffs allege defendants caused the following: personal injury, a need for medical monitoring, property damage or other economic losses. These various damage claims reveal the far-reaching impact of this firefighting product. Moreover, as legal battles intensify, stakeholders must comprehend the multifaceted nature of emerging claims in this nationwide litigation, including:
Environmental Impact Claims
Claims related to the environmental impact of AFFF constitute a significant category. Firefighting foam containing PFAS soil and water contamination. More than half of the States affected by these pollutants have filed suit seeking restitution for the harm caused to natural resources.
Health-Related Claims
Firefighters and people who drank contaminated water filed health-related damage claims. Individuals exposed to AFFF allege adverse health effects, including cancers, thyroid disorders, and developmental issues. Plaintiffs argue that manufacturers were aware of potential health risks associated with PFAS but failed to adequately warn users.
Property Damage Claims
A substantial portion of the litigation involves property damage claims. Airports and fire departments extensively used firefighting foam without knowledge it would pollute their property. Public entities with property damage seek compensation for the costs of environmental testing and cleanup.
Public Water System Claims
The economic impact of AFFF use extends beyond immediate property damage. Public water systems have sued due to the financial burden of addressing AFFF-related issues. Water systems seek to recover costs for testing and treatment of contaminated public water sources.
Insurance Subrogation Claims
Insurance companies, having paid out claims related to AFFF contamination, may pursue subrogation claims against manufacturers and distributors. These claims seek to recover amounts paid to policyholders for damages caused by AFFF.
Conclusion
Comprehending the diverse array of damage claims in the AFFF firefighting foam MDL is crucial for stakeholders navigating the legal landscape. As the litigation unfolds, the resolution of these claims will play a pivotal role in shaping the future regulatory environment surrounding firefighting foam and holding responsible parties accountable for the widespread impact of AFFF use. Our clean groundwater website provides additional details about the settlements and claims available to municipalities.
