AFFF Lawyer: Hiring Process Factors You Should Know

Published By:
Picture of Jessica Paluch-Hoerman
Jessica Paluch-Hoerman

Attorney Jessica Paluch-Hoerman, founder of TruLaw, has over 28 years of experience as a personal injury and mass tort attorney, and previously worked as an international tax attorney at Deloitte. Jessie collaborates with attorneys nationwide — enabling her to share reliable, up-to-date legal information with our readers.

This article has been written and reviewed for legal accuracy and clarity by the team of writers and legal experts at TruLaw and is as accurate as possible. This content should not be taken as legal advice from an attorney. If you would like to learn more about our owner and experienced injury lawyer, Jessie Paluch, you can do so here.

TruLaw does everything possible to make sure the information in this article is up to date and accurate. If you need specific legal advice about your case, contact us by using the chat on the bottom of this page. This article should not be taken as advice from an attorney.

Key takeaways:

  • When hiring an AFFF lawyer, consider their experience and expertise in handling AFFF and military firefighting cases.
  • Also, consider the lawyer's reputation, professionalism, and ability to communicate effectively.
  • AFFF lawsuits require different defense strategies for each case.

AFFF Lawyer: Hiring Process Factors You Should Know

AFFF lawyers specialize in handling cases involving government contractors, training exercises, and military-related matters, including those related to the air force.

They have a deep understanding of the relevant laws and regulations and can assist you in building a strong case.

When hiring an AFFF lawyer, consider their experience and expertise in handling AFFF and military firefighting cases.

Look for a lawyer with a successful track record and knowledge of the unique challenges involved.

AFFF Lawyer Hiring Process Factors You Should Know; Here are some of the factors: Extent of Harm Medical Expenses Lost Income Pain and Suffering Legal Representation; Contingency Fee Arrangements A Pathway to Justice; Types of compensation available for individuals affected by AFFF contamination; Factors considered when determining the amount of compensation in an AFFF lawsuit settlement.

Also, consider the lawyer’s reputation, professionalism, and ability to communicate effectively.

It’s important to feel comfortable and confident in their abilities.

Discuss the fees and payment structure with the attorney before hiring them.

Understand the costs involved and how they charge for their services.

Table of Contents

AFFF Lawsuit Updates Timeline

July 1st, 2025: July 2025 JPML Update

As of July 1, 2025, the AFFF firefighting foam multidistrict litigation (MDL) has reached 10,520 total cases, up from 10,391 in June.

This steady growth underscores the continued rise in PFAS-related exposure claims linked to AFFF use.

Plaintiffs include firefighters, military personnel, and airport workers who allege long-term health complications—such as cancer—resulting from toxic chemical exposure.

The court is advancing the bellwether selection process, with case-specific discovery underway to help determine which claims will proceed to trial first.

Settlement discussions are ongoing with select defendants, though no overarching agreement has been reached.

If you or a loved one have suffered from health problems related to AFFF exposure, you may qualify to pursue compensation.

Contact Tru Law using the chat on this page to determine if you qualify for filing an AFFF Firefighting Foam Lawsuit.

June 25th, 2025: Judge Encourages Settlement Ahead of First AFFF Injury Trial

U.S. District Judge Richard Gergel is encouraging the parties involved in the Aqueous Film-Forming Foam (AFFF) multidistrict litigation (MDL) to reach a settlement prior to the first personal injury bellwether trial, currently set for October 20.

The upcoming trial centers on a plaintiff who claims that exposure to PFAS chemicals in drinking water contaminated by AFFF led to the development of kidney cancer.

Plaintiffs had sought to add testicular cancer allegations to the case, but Judge Gergel denied the request, citing concerns that it could confuse the jury.

This trial will be the first personal injury case to move forward in the AFFF MDL, which until now has primarily dealt with public water system contamination claims.

A pre-trial settlement would represent a significant milestone in resolving claims brought by individuals alleging harm from PFAS exposure.

June 16th, 2025: Study Reveals Firefighting Foam Chemicals May Accelerate Cancer and Reduce Chemotherapy Effectiveness

A new study published June 6 in the Journal of Environmental Sciences raises serious concerns about the impact of PFAS chemicals in firefighting foam on cancer progression and chemotherapy outcomes.

Researchers from the Medical University of Gdańsk found that two widely used PFAS compounds—PFOA and PFOS—accelerated prostate cancer cell growth at low exposure levels.

These chemicals also interfered with common prostate cancer treatments like cabazitaxel and docetaxel, altering their effectiveness depending on the cancer cell type.

In some cases, PFOS made chemotherapy more toxic to cancer cells, while in others, it reduced drug effectiveness.

PFOA similarly affected the performance of cabazitaxel, complicating efforts to predict treatment outcomes.

Alarmingly, even normal prostate cells showed high sensitivity to PFAS, reacting negatively at lower doses than cancer cells.

These findings could have major implications for lawsuits involving AFFF firefighting foam and PFAS-related cancer claims.

June 9th, 2025: New Study Confirms Elevated PFAS Exposure in Firefighters, Raises Alarms for Healthcare Workers

A new University of Arizona Health Sciences study confirms that firefighters continue to have the highest levels of toxic PFAS chemicals in their blood, reinforcing long-standing concerns about AFFF (aqueous film-forming foam) and PFAS-treated turnout gear.

The study, part of the AZ HEROES project, analyzed nearly 2,000 essential workers—making it the first large-scale comparison of PFAS exposure across different professions.

Firefighters showed significantly elevated levels of PFHxS, PFOS variants, and PFHpS—PFAS compounds closely tied to firefighting materials.

Notably, the study also found that healthcare workers had elevated PFAS levels, especially PFHpS and PFUnA, with increased odds of having Sb-PFOA and PFDoA in their systems.

Researchers believe this may be linked to prolonged exposure to medical gowns, masks, and other protective equipment.

These findings further validate claims raised in AFFF firefighting foam lawsuits and may have

implications for expanding occupational PFAS litigation to include healthcare professionals.

June 5th, 2025: Rhode Island Moves Toward Banning PFAS in Firefighter Gear and Biosolids

Rhode Island lawmakers are poised to approve two key bills designed to reduce exposure to toxic PFAS chemicals.

One bill would ban the sale and distribution of firefighter turnout gear containing intentionally added PFAS, with the ban taking effect on January 1, 2027.

Previously delayed due to limited alternatives, the legislation has gained momentum now that PFAS-free gear is available.

Firefighter advocates stress the urgency, pointing to studies showing that every layer of traditional gear contains PFAS, which breaks down and increases long-term health risks.

A second bill addresses PFAS contamination in biosolids—sludge from wastewater treatment—by requiring mandatory testing before land application.

The Rhode Island Department of Environmental Management would have authority to reject biosolids deemed a public or environmental hazard due to PFAS levels.

Both bills have cleared critical committees and are expected to pass before the legislative session ends.

These legislative efforts reflect growing concerns over PFAS exposure for firefighters and residents living near wastewater treatment and disposal sites.

June 3rd, 2025: New Study Highlights Persistent PFAS Exposure from AFFF Foam in Firefighters

A new study examining nearly 2,000 emergency workers between July 2020 and April 2023 found that firefighters carried the highest and most persistent levels of PFAS in their blood—particularly PFHxS, PFOS, and PFHpS.

Unlike healthcare workers and other first responders, whose PFAS levels declined over time, firefighters’ levels remained elevated throughout the study period.

Researchers point to Aqueous Film Forming Foam (AFFF) as a primary source of this continued exposure.

Used in fire suppression for decades, AFFF contains toxic PFAS chemicals now linked to cancer, hormone disruption, and other serious health conditions.

Firefighters and attorneys allege that long-term exposure to both AFFF and PFAS-treated turnout gear has contributed to severe illness.

These findings add urgency to ongoing efforts to eliminate PFAS from fire service equipment and reinforce the legal claims of those pursuing AFFF lawsuits.

June 2nd, 2025: June 2025 JPML Update

The AFFF firefighting foam lawsuit continues to grow, with 1,049 new cases added to the MDL in the past month.

As of now, 10,391 total cases have been filed—marking an increase of 2,758 filings since January 1, 2025.

These claims are being heard in the U.S. District Court for the District of South Carolina.

The first bellwether trial, focused on kidney and testicular cancer, is set to begin on October 6, 2025.

If you or a loved one have suffered from health problems related to AFFF exposure, you may qualify to pursue compensation.

Contact TruLaw using the chat on this page to determine if you qualify for filing an AFFF Firefighting Foam Lawsuit.

May 28th, 2025: Plaintiffs Push to Prioritize Three Kidney Cancer Cases in Upcoming AFFF Bellwether Trials

Plaintiffs in the AFFF multidistrict litigation (MDL) are urging Judge Richard Gergel to prioritize three kidney cancer cases for the first round of bellwether trials, scheduled to begin on October 20, 2025.

This request comes as the court evaluates how to structure the initial phase of trials in a massive MDL involving over 9,000 claims tied to PFAS-contaminated drinking water.

In a letter dated May 16, plaintiffs proposed beginning with the case of Donnelly, followed by those of Clinton Speers and Kevin Voelker.

All three men developed kidney cancer after consuming water from the same source in Pennsylvania—making their cases, according to plaintiffs, strong examples of direct causation with minimal complicating health factors.

For instance, Donnelly reportedly had only mild obesity and no other significant medical history, underscoring the alleged link between PFAS exposure and the development of kidney cancer.

The plaintiffs assert that trying these three cases first would align with the court’s earlier directive to avoid initial trials with distracting or confounding background issues.

They argue this strategy would offer juries a straightforward look at how exposure to AFFF chemicals in drinking water can lead to serious health outcomes like kidney cancer.

In the event the court decides against full consolidation with related testicular cancer claims, plaintiffs have also requested that the three kidney cancer cases be tried together to maintain focus and efficiency.

However, defendants oppose any form of consolidation and have instead pushed for Voelker’s case to be tried first as a standalone.

As of now, Judge Gergel has not ruled on how the initial bellwether trials will be structured.

The outcome of this decision will play a critical role in shaping the trajectory of the broader AFFF litigation.

May 20th, 2025: Connecticut Firefighters Advocate for PFAS-Free Gear Amid Rising Cancer Concerns

With cancer remaining the leading cause of death among firefighters, Connecticut lawmakers are pushing forward with new initiatives aimed at reducing PFAS exposure through safer protective gear.

House Bill 7120 proposes $3 million in state funding to help fire departments replace turnout gear containing PFAS and to support cancer screening and treatment programs for firefighters.

PFAS—short for per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances and often called “forever chemicals”—are widely used in firefighting foam and protective gear due to their water- and heat-resistant properties.

However, mounting research has linked these chemicals to cancer and other severe health conditions.

According to the International Association of Fire Fighters, all three layers of standard turnout gear are embedded with PFAS, meaning firefighters face toxic exposure during each use.

Although Connecticut banned PFAS-based firefighting foam in 2021, many departments continue to use gear that contains these harmful substances.

The cost of PFAS-free alternatives—approximately $4,000 per set—has been a significant barrier.

Additionally, some fire departments have raised concerns about the performance of PFAS-free gear, noting issues such as reduced durability, increased heat stress, and greater risk of cardiac strain during emergency responses.

House Bill 7120 seeks to address these challenges by offering financial assistance to departments transitioning to PFAS-free gear, reimbursing early adopters, and funding cancer prevention and detection efforts.

The bill complements Senate Bill 292, which will ban the sale of PFAS-containing products in Connecticut starting in 2028.

This legislative action reflects growing public health concerns that echo the core issues in the ongoing AFFF firefighting foam lawsuits.

Firefighters and communities across the country are pursuing legal action, alleging that prolonged PFAS exposure has resulted in serious health consequences, including cancer.

May 15th, 2025: Oregon Becomes 16th State to Ban PFAS-Based Firefighting Foam

On May 22, Governor Tina Kotek signed Senate Bill 91 into law, officially making Oregon the 16th state to ban the use of PFAS-based firefighting foam in most circumstances.

This new legislation significantly limits the use of these hazardous chemicals, allowing exceptions only where federal regulations require them—such as at airports.

PFAS, commonly referred to as “forever chemicals” because they do not break down easily in the body or environment, have been linked to serious health risks including cancer, hormone disruption, and weakened immune function.

These risks are at the heart of the ongoing AFFF firefighting foam litigation, where firefighters and affected communities allege that long-term exposure to PFAS has led to major health problems and environmental damage.

The passage of Senate Bill 91 is being celebrated as a major public health achievement, especially for firefighters who are disproportionately exposed to PFAS and face increased cancer risks as a result.

Environmental and consumer advocacy organizations, including OSPIRG and Environment Oregon, applauded the move as a vital measure to safeguard both human health and Oregon’s natural ecosystems.

May 13th, 2025: AFFF MDL Bellwether Trial to Focus on Kidney Cancer Claims

The federal judge presiding over the AFFF multidistrict litigation (MDL) has ruled that the first bellwether personal injury trial will focus solely on kidney cancer claims.

This decision excludes testicular cancer allegations to keep the trial streamlined and avoid jury confusion.

Scheduled to begin on October 20, 2025, the trial may feature up to three plaintiffs, though the court has not yet decided whether the cases will be tried jointly or separately.

While plaintiffs originally pushed to include five cases involving both kidney and testicular cancer, the court sided with the defense’s proposal to limit the scope.

The court has now directed plaintiffs to rank their top three cases if only one is selected to proceed.

Currently, nearly 10,000 personal injury lawsuits are pending in the AFFF MDL, many of them linked to communities like Horsham and Warminster, Pennsylvania, where PFAS exposure from military bases has contaminated drinking water.

Major defendants include 3M, DuPont, BASF/Ciba, and Arkema.

This phase of the litigation requires detailed presentation of medical evidence and expert testimony, differentiating it from earlier water contamination settlements.

A Science Day is scheduled for June 20, 2025, where experts will present research linking PFAS exposure to cancer.

The court will revisit the question of case consolidation following rulings on Daubert and summary judgment motions later this summer.

May 3rd, 2025: Filing Surge Suggests Settlement Talks Heating Up

The AFFF Lawsuit continues to gain momentum as more than 400 new cases were added to the multidistrict litigation (MDL) in the past month alone.

This surge in filings makes AFFF one of the most active mass tort dockets in the country.

Hundreds of lawsuits have been filed directly into the MDL, while many more have been transferred from courts across the U.S.

The increase reflects growing legal coordination and pressure on manufacturers to resolve claims alleging that aqueous film-forming foam (AFFF) exposure led to cancer and other health issues.

Although no settlement has been announced, legal experts believe negotiations may be underway.

AFFF Lawyers expect that progress toward a resolution could be revealed as early as this summer.

With trial preparation advancing and discovery underway, a settlement framework may soon take shape for thousands of affected plaintiffs, including military personnel and firefighters.

May 1st, 2025: May 2025 JPML Update

The AFFF Firefighting Foam Lawsuit continues to grow steadily as more individuals come forward with claims tied to PFAS exposure.

AFFF, widely used by firefighters and military personnel, contains toxic “forever chemicals” known as PFAS—substances linked to kidney cancer, testicular cancer, thyroid disease, and other serious health problems.

Plaintiffs allege that manufacturers knowingly failed to warn users about these health risks, despite mounting evidence of PFAS toxicity.

In the last month alone, 414 new cases were added to the AFFF multidistrict litigation (MDL), bringing the total number of new filings in 2025 to 1,709.

The lawsuits are centralized in the U.S. District Court for the District of South Carolina.

The first bellwether trial is scheduled for October 6, 2025, and will focus on claims involving kidney and testicular cancer.

These early trials will help shape the trajectory of future settlements and compensation for those harmed by AFFF exposure.

If you or a loved one have suffered from health problems related to AFFF exposure, you may qualify to pursue compensation.

Contact TruLaw using the chat on this page to determine if you qualify for filing an AFFF Firefighting Foam Lawsuit.

April 19th, 2025: DOD Faces Challenges Phasing Out AFFF-Containing Firefighting Foam

The U.S. Department of Defense (DOD) is moving forward with efforts to phase out aqueous film-forming foam (AFFF), a firefighting product containing harmful PFAS chemicals linked to cancer, liver disease, immune system damage, and thyroid problems.

Under the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020, the DOD was initially required to end the use of AFFF by October 2024.

However, due to challenges in finding fully effective replacements, the deadline has been extended to 2026 for certain applications.

While PFAS-free alternatives are available, they often present operational limitations, such as reduced temperature tolerance and the need for immediate mixing with water before deployment—unlike AFFF, which comes pre-mixed for emergencies.

The transition is expected to cost over $2.1 billion, covering system upgrades, firefighter training, and new equipment purchases.

In response to ongoing concerns, several states have launched take-back programs to collect and safely dispose of AFFF, collecting more than 553,000 gallons to date.

North Carolina alone has invested $20 million to collect 120,000 gallons, highlighting the scale and financial burden of this cleanup effort.

Some states are offering financial incentives to help fire departments transition to safer, PFAS-free alternatives.

These initiatives reflect growing momentum to reduce PFAS exposure and limit its devastating impact on public health.

If you or a loved one have suffered from health problems related to AFFF exposure, you may qualify to pursue compensation.

Contact TruLaw using the chat on this page to determine if you qualify for filing an AFFF Firefighting Foam Lawsuit.

April 11th, 2025: Brunswick Landing Removes Nearly 1,000 Gallons of Toxic AFFF

Brunswick Landing has successfully removed nearly 1,000 gallons of toxic aqueous film-forming foam (AFFF) from one of its airport hangars, marking a major milestone in Maine’s efforts to eliminate firefighting products contaminated with PFAS.

The Midcoast Regional Redevelopment Authority (MRRA) confirmed that Hangar 6, which had contained 975 gallons of AFFF containing the harmful chemical PFOS, has now been decommissioned and updated with a fire suppression system free of PFAS.

This action follows a significant 2023 spill at nearby Hangar 4, where a malfunction released 1,450 gallons of AFFF mixed with 50,000 gallons of water.

The incident prompted statewide alarm and increased scrutiny over the storage and disposal of AFFF.

The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers is now collaborating with MRRA to develop safe methods for destroying the foam concentrate.

Environmental groups remain cautious, but MRRA’s executive director described the cleanup as a “proactive approach” to addressing the ongoing PFAS risks.

These efforts at Brunswick Landing come as national litigation continues over AFFF exposure, with thousands of claims linked to the foam’s role in cancer and water contamination.

If you or a loved one have suffered from health problems related to AFFF exposure, you may qualify to pursue compensation.

Contact TruLaw using the chat on this page to determine if you qualify for filing an AFFF Firefighting Foam Lawsuit.

April 1st, 2025: April 2025 JPML Update

The AFFF firefighting foam litigation saw a substantial rise in case filings between March and April 2025.

In March, 8,430 total cases were filed, including 338 new entries into the multidistrict litigation (MDL).

By April, that number increased to 8,928—an addition of 498 new cases.

This growth reflects continued momentum in the legal battle over AFFF exposure, particularly among individuals stationed at or living near military bases.

Plaintiffs allege that long-term exposure to PFAS chemicals in AFFF has caused serious health issues, including cancer, prompting a surge in claims against foam manufacturers.

If you or a loved one have suffered from health problems related to AFFF exposure, you may qualify to pursue compensation.

Contact TruLaw using the chat on this page to determine if you qualify for filing an AFFF Firefighting Foam Lawsuit.

March 20th, 2025: Upcoming Bellwether Trials and Expansion of Accepted Injuries

The AFFF Lawsuit is moving forward, with bellwether trials scheduled to evaluate personal injury claims related to PFAS exposure in firefighting foam litigation.

The first bellwether trial is set for October 6, 2025, focusing on kidney cancer and testicular cancer claims. The trial will help determine how juries respond to key evidence, shaping potential settlements and guiding future proceedings.

Expansion of Accepted Injuries

Initially, the AFFF MDL primarily included kidney cancer and testicular cancer claims.

However, the court has expanded the litigation to include additional health conditions linked to PFAS exposure, including:

  • Thyroid Cancer: Lawsuits allege that AFFF exposure contributed to the development of thyroid cancer in firefighters and military personnel.
  • Liver Cancer: The court is now considering claims asserting that PFAS chemicals in firefighting foam caused liver cancer in exposed individuals.

As litigation progresses, these bellwether trials will play a critical role in determining the potential for AFFF settlements and compensation for affected plaintiffs.

If you or a loved one have suffered from health problems related to AFFF exposure, you may qualify to pursue compensation.

Contact TruLaw using the chat on this page to determine if you qualify for filing an AFFF Firefighting Foam Lawsuit.

March 3rd, 2025: AFFF Lawsuit Increases by 338 Cases

The AFFF Lawsuit involves allegations that aqueous film-forming foam (AFFF), used by firefighters and military personnel, contains PFAS “forever chemicals” linked to cancer and other serious health risks.

Plaintiffs claim that manufacturers failed to warn users about these dangers, causing widespread harm.

In February, 8,092 cases were pending in the AFFF MDL, a number that increased to 8,430 in March with 338 new claims added.

This ongoing rise reflects heightened awareness and legal action from those impacted by PFAS exposure.

Most AFFF cases are being litigated in the U.S. District Court – Southern Carolina (MDL), where bellwether trials are scheduled.

The first trial, addressing kidney and testicular cancer claims, is set for October 6, 2025, with other injury claims following a separate timeline.

If you or a loved one have suffered from health problems related to AFFF exposure, you may qualify to pursue compensation.

Contact TruLaw using the chat on this page to determine if you qualify for filing an AFFF Firefighting Foam Lawsuit.

February 17th, 2025: AFFF Litigation Expands to Address Liver and Thyroid Cancer Risks

The AFFF Lawsuit is ongoing. 

The federal court overseeing AFFF firefighting foam lawsuits is expanding its review of potential health risks, now examining claims related to liver cancer and thyroid cancer.

The judge presiding over the AFFF multidistrict litigation (MDL) has requested that attorneys submit proposals by February 21 outlining deadlines for expert reports, depositions, and scientific challenges regarding these newly reviewed conditions.

The court has also scheduled a “Science Day” for June 6, 2025, where both plaintiffs and defendants will present scientific evidence on the link between AFFF exposure and liver and thyroid cancer.

This session aims to educate the court on the complex medical and environmental issues central to the litigation.

This development follows the initial round of bellwether trials, which focus on kidney cancer, testicular cancer, thyroid disease, and ulcerative colitis.

While these early trials do not establish binding precedent, their outcomes will likely influence future AFFF settlements and compensation for thousands of plaintiffs.

If you or a loved one have suffered from health problems related to AFFF exposure, you may qualify to pursue compensation.

Contact TruLaw using the chat on this page to determine if you qualify for filing an AFFF Firefighting Foam Lawsuit.

February 3rd, 2025: AFFF MDL adds 459 cases

The AFFF Firefighting Foam lawsuit centers on allegations that aqueous film-forming foam (AFFF), commonly used by firefighters and military personnel, contains PFAS “forever chemicals” associated with cancer and other serious health conditions.

Plaintiffs argue that manufacturers failed to warn users about these risks, resulting in significant harm.

At the beginning of the year, 7,633 cases were pending in the AFFF MDL, a number that grew to 8,092 by February, with 459 new claims filed.

If you or a loved one have suffered from health problems related to AFFF exposure, you may qualify to pursue compensation.

Contact TruLaw using the chat on this page to determine if you qualify for filing an AFFF Firefighting Foam Lawsuit.

January 12th, 2025: University at Buffalo Study Finds That AFFF Chemicals Penetrate Brain, Alter 11 Key Genes

A recent study from the University at Buffalo sheds light on concerning revelations regarding PFAS, the “forever chemicals” found in AFFF firefighting foam.

Researchers found that PFAS can penetrate the blood-brain barrier, accumulate in brain tissue, and interfere with essential genes responsible for brain health.

The study highlighted 11 genes impacted by PFAS exposure, including one that safeguards neuronal cells but gets suppressed, and another linked to cell death that becomes excessively active.

These findings, along with PFAS’s potential to alter hundreds of other genes based on their chemical structure, underscore the complexity of their neurotoxic effects.

Given the ongoing litigation over PFAS exposure from firefighting foam, this new evidence could strengthen the cases of individuals claiming health damages from PFAS contamination in water supplies near military bases and airports.

As researchers continue to explore PFAS’s effects, these findings may influence future regulations and legal accountability.

If you or a loved one have suffered from health problems related to AFFF exposure, you may qualify to pursue compensation.

Contact TruLaw using the chat on this page to determine if you qualify for filing an AFFF Firefighting Foam Lawsuit.

January 6th, 2025: EPA Adds 9 New PFAS Compounds to Toxics Registry, Tightens AFFF Industry Oversight

The AFFF Lawsuit is ongoing.

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has expanded its Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) by adding nine new PFAS compounds, further increasing federal oversight of these hazardous “forever chemicals.”

This addition directly affects industries and facilities that manufacture, process, or use PFAS, including those linked to aqueous film-forming foam (AFFF), a firefighting foam long associated with environmental contamination.

The newly listed PFAS compounds include:

  • Ammonium perfluorodecanoate (PFDA NH4)
  • Sodium perfluorodecanoate (PFDA-Na)
  • Perfluoro-3-methoxypropanoic acid
  • 6:2 Fluorotelomer sulfonate acid
  • 6:2 Fluorotelomer sulfonate anion
  • 6:2 Fluorotelomer sulfonate potassium salt
  • 6:2 Fluorotelomer sulfonate ammonium salt
  • 6:2 Fluorotelomer sulfonate sodium salt
  • Acetic acid, [(γ-ω-perfluoro-C8-10-alkyl)thio] derivs., Bu esters

Facilities using these chemicals must now report annually if specific thresholds are met.

These reports will enhance transparency, helping communities identify potential exposure risks, particularly in areas affected by AFFF spills or usage.

The data will also support regulatory actions and remediation planning.

Facilities are required to track these PFAS immediately, with reporting forms due to the EPA by July 2026.

This development highlights AFFF’s role in groundwater contamination and underscores the push for accountability and safer firefighting alternatives.

If you or a loved one have suffered from health problems related to AFFF exposure, you may qualify to pursue compensation.

Contact Trulaw using the chat on this page to determine if you qualify for filing an AFFF Firefighting Foam Lawsuit.

January 2nd, 2025: AFFF Lawsuit Cases Surge to 7,633 as PFAS 'Forever Chemicals' Litigation Expands

Firefighting foam containing PFAS, often called “forever chemicals,” is a critical concern due to its environmental persistence and links to cancer and other severe health issues.

AFFF (aqueous film-forming foam) was initially developed for military and airport use but has been widely deployed for decades despite mounting evidence of its harmful impacts.

The AFFF multidistrict litigation (MDL), consolidated in the US District Court for the District of South Carolina, continues to grow.

In December 2024, 7,370 cases were pending, increasing to 7,633 by January 2025, reflecting 263 new claims in a single month.

Significant updates regarding AFFF include:

  • Environmental Contamination: AFFF use at fire training sites, airports, and military bases has caused widespread groundwater and drinking water contamination. States like Maine face high remediation costs due to PFAS’s resistance to degradation and its accumulation in ecosystems and human bodies.
  • Health Risks for Firefighters: Research links AFFF exposure to elevated cancer risks among firefighters, with occupational cancer accounting for 72% of firefighter line-of-duty deaths. Many feel trapped by health issues caused by exposure.
  • Transition Challenges: Replacing AFFF with fluorine-free alternatives poses logistical and financial challenges. Fire departments must decontaminate equipment, safely dispose of old stocks, and ensure new foams meet safety standards.
  • State Responses: States like Maine are considering laws to mandate AFFF inventories and fund takeback programs. Colorado has already implemented mechanisms to assist municipalities in transitioning away from PFAS-based foams.
  • Legal Action: Maine has joined lawsuits against chemical manufacturers such as 3M and DuPont, seeking compensation for PFAS-related damages. With over 10,000 cases consolidated in the MDL, settlements could support cleanup and remediation nationwide.

Rising awareness of AFFF’s dangers has increased demands for stricter regulations, expanded remediation funding, and stronger support for affected communities and firefighters.

Transitioning to safer alternatives and effective PFAS management remains a pressing priority.

If you or a loved one have suffered from health problems related to AFFF exposure, you may qualify to pursue compensation.

Contact TruLaw using the chat on this page to determine if you qualify for filing an AFFF Firefighting Foam Lawsuit.

December 2nd, 2024: AFFF Bellwether Trials Set for October 2025 as Cancer Lawsuits Reach 7,370 Cases

The AFFF Firefighting Foam lawsuit involves allegations that aqueous film-forming foam (AFFF) contains PFAS “forever chemicals” linked to cancer and other serious health conditions.

Plaintiffs claim manufacturers failed to warn about these risks, resulting in widespread harm.

Case filings rose from 7,150 in November to 7,370 in December, with 220 new claims added.

Most AFFF cases are being handled in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of South Carolina (MDL).

Bellwether trials are set to begin on October 6, 2025, with the first case focusing on kidney or testicular cancer.

Trial dates for other injuries remain pending.

If you or a loved one have suffered from health problems related to AFFF exposure, you may qualify to pursue compensation.

Contact TruLaw using the chat on this page to determine if you qualify for filing an AFFF Firefighting Foam Lawsuit.

November 21st, 2024: DoD Identifies 700 Military Bases with PFAS Contamination from AFFF Firefighting Foam

The AFFF lawsuit continues as efforts intensify to tackle contamination caused by aqueous film-forming foam (AFFF), which contains toxic PFAS chemicals.

Lawmakers are pushing for stronger monitoring and prevention measures at military installations.

The Department of Defense (DoD) has identified over 1,500 facilities using AFFF, with 700 confirmed as sites of significant PFAS contamination.

Health Risks and Legislative Efforts

PFAS, often called “forever chemicals,” are associated with severe health problems, including cancer, reproductive issues, and immune system disorders.

Military facilities are a major source of PFAS contamination, polluting nearby drinking water supplies.

Bipartisan lawmakers are advocating for Section 319 of the DoD PFAS Discharge Prevention Act to be included in the FY25 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA).

This provision would:

  • Require regular PFAS monitoring at military bases.
  • Establish tailored management practices to reduce PFAS runoff and protect nearby communities.

Current Challenges

The 2020 mandate to phase out AFFF faces delays due to logistical challenges.

A Government Accountability Office (GAO) report emphasizes the need for faster progress and solutions to address ongoing contamination.

High-risk sites like Langley Air Force Base and Naval Air Station Oceana demonstrate the urgency of these measures.

New research reveals higher levels of branched perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA), a known carcinogen, in AFFF than previously thought.

Studies indicate these levels can double over time in the environment, raising serious concerns about their long-term persistence and toxicity.

Outlook

Momentum is building for stricter PFAS regulations.

Including Section 319 in the FY25 NDAA could significantly enhance efforts to reduce PFAS exposure, protect public health, and lower cleanup costs.

This legislation represents a critical step toward addressing the lasting impacts of AFFF contamination on military personnel, their families, and surrounding communities.

November 4th, 2024: Indiana AFFF Disposal Program Ends December 30, Fire Departments Face December 1 Deadline

The AFFF Lawsuit is ongoing. 

Indiana’s PFAS firefighting foam collection and disposal program, aimed at reducing firefighters’ exposure to these hazardous chemicals, is set to end on December 30.

This initiative, managed by the Indiana Department of Homeland Security (IDHS) with the Department of Environmental Management, reflects broader health efforts to limit exposure to “forever chemicals.”

Linked to immune disorders, developmental issues in children, and cancer — the leading cause of death among firefighters — PFAS-based foams are commonly used to fight Class B fires involving flammable liquids like gasoline.

The IDHS is urging Indiana fire departments to join the program before its December 1 deadline.

Financial limitations after the program ends may hinder further disposal efforts. PFAS chemicals, meanwhile, persist as a national concern, found in consumer products like non-stick cookware and fast-food wrappers.

Despite some recent regulatory actions from the EPA, thousands of PFAS compounds remain unregulated, posing an ongoing public health challenge.

If you or a loved one have suffered from health problems related to AFFF exposure, you may qualify to pursue compensation.

Contact TruLaw using the chat on this page to determine if you qualify for filing an AFFF Firefighting Foam Lawsuit.

November 1st, 2024: Nearly 3,000 AFFF Cases Dismissed from Bellwether Trial Pool, Count Falls to 7,150

The AFFF Lawsuit is ongoing.

The AFFF Firefighting Foam Litigation involves claims that aqueous film-forming foam (AFFF), widely used by firefighters and military personnel, contains harmful PFAS “forever chemicals” linked to cancer and severe health conditions.

Plaintiffs argue that manufacturers failed to adequately warn users of these risks, resulting in significant health impacts.

In October, the total number of cases reached 9,896; however, by November, the case count saw a significant drop to 7,150—a reduction of 2,746 cases.

This decline is mainly attributed to consolidations or dismissals related to injuries that did not align with the bellwether injury list.

Most AFFF cases are centralized in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of South Carolina (Charleston Division), where the MDL court has identified cases for the initial personal injury bellwether trial pool and outlined a scheduling order.

This timeline sets deadlines for depositions, expert discovery, dispositive motions, expert challenges, and pretrial proceedings.

The first trial is slated for October 6, 2025, featuring a plaintiff with kidney or testicular cancer.

Plaintiffs with other types of injuries are following a secondary schedule, with trial dates to be determined.

If you or a loved one have suffered from health problems related to AFFF exposure, you may qualify to pursue compensation.

Contact TruLaw using the chat on this page to determine if you qualify for filing an AFFF Fire Fighting Foam Lawsuit.

October 23rd, 2024: Carrier Global Pays $615 Million to Settle Firefighting Foam Cancer Lawsuits

Carrier Global Corp has reached three settlement agreements totaling $615 million to resolve lawsuits concerning Aqueous Film-Forming Foam (AFFF).

These settlements are intended to address claims within the AFFF multidistrict litigation (MDL) in South Carolina, involving plaintiffs affected by contamination and health risks tied to the use of firefighting foam.

The agreement also resolves claims against Kidde-Fenwal (KFI), a former subsidiary of Carrier, which manufactured AFFF and is now in bankruptcy proceedings.

KFI has faced extensive litigation related to health conditions such as cancer and water contamination linked to chemicals in AFFF, particularly per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), which have been associated with serious illnesses like kidney, bladder, and testicular cancer.

The $615 million settlement forms part of a wider effort by companies involved in AFFF litigation, such as 3M and DuPont, to address mounting legal and financial pressures from other contamination-related claims.

If you or a loved one was exposed to firefighting foam and developed cancer, contact an AFFF Lawyer from TruLaw for a free, no-obligation consultation to find out if you qualify for an AFFF Lawsuit. 

You can also use the chatbot on this page to check your eligibility instantly.

October 1st, 2024: AFFF Lawsuits Surge to Nearly 10,000 Cases as VA Probes Cancer Link

The AFFF Lawsuit is ongoing. 

The AFFF Firefighting Foam Lawsuit focuses on the harmful effects of exposure to per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), commonly found in military-grade firefighting foam.

These “forever chemicals” are linked to numerous serious health issues due to their persistence in the environment and human body.

As of September 1st, 9,576 cases were filed in the AFFF MDL.

By October, that number rose to 9,896.

This surge highlights growing awareness of the dangers posed by PFAS exposure from AFFF, as more studies continue to link these chemicals to various cancers and debilitating illnesses.

The Department of Veterans Affairs is conducting an investigation to determine if kidney cancer can be linked to PFAS exposure.

The outcome of this investigation could designate kidney cancer as a presumptive service-connected condition, allowing veterans faster access to healthcare and benefits.

This study reflects increasing concerns about the association between PFAS exposure and cancer, particularly among veterans exposed to these chemicals during military service.

If you or a loved one was exposed to firefighting foam and developed cancer, contact an AFFF Lawyer from TruLaw for a free, no-obligation consultation to find out if you qualify for an AFFF Lawsuit. 

You can also use the chatbot on this page to check your eligibility instantly.

September 19th, 2024: 12 Firefighters Sue 3M Over Cancer Claims from Toxic Firefighting Foam

The AFFF Lawsuit is ongoing.

In recent developments in the Aqueous Film Forming Foam (AFFF) litigation, a group of firefighters has filed a lawsuit against major chemical companies, including 3M.

The lawsuit alleges severe health impacts due to long-term exposure to toxic PFAS chemicals in AFFF.

The 12 plaintiffs claim that their exposure to AFFF has led to serious health conditions, including prostate cancer, leukemia, and kidney cancer.

Despite decades of research highlighting the dangers of PFAS, the companies allegedly failed to provide adequate warnings or implement safety measures, continuing to distribute the foam without proper consent.

The plaintiffs seek medical monitoring, injunctive relief, and accountability for the harm caused by AFFF.

Meanwhile, in Brunswick, Maine, the Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) continues comprehensive testing following a major AFFF spill in August 2024.

Soil and water sampling has revealed PFAS contamination in local watersheds and marine environments, with elevated PFAS levels found in some soil samples.

While public water supplies remain safe, and no direct contamination has been found, the DEP has advised the public to avoid recreational activities in the affected areas.

Testing will continue, and further updates are expected as the cleanup progresses.

If you or a loved one was exposed to firefighting foam and developed cancer, contact an attorney from TruLaw for a free, no-obligation consultation today to find out if you qualify for a firefighting foam lawsuit. 

You can also use the chatbot on this page to check your eligibility for legal action instantly.

September 5th, 2024: Minnesota Orders 3M to Limit PFAS Discharge Into Mississippi River for First Time

The AFFF Lawsuit is ongoing. 

The ongoing AFFF (Aqueous Film Forming Foam) firefighting lawsuits have emerged as a major legal and environmental issue due to the presence of PFAS (per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances), often called “forever chemicals.”

These chemicals, found in products like firefighting foam, have been linked to serious health risks, including cancer, and have contaminated water supplies in various locations.

Minnesota’s Regulatory Actions: For the first time, Minnesota is requiring 3M to limit PFAS discharge into the Mississippi River from its Cottage Grove plant.

This follows long-standing concerns about contamination of fish and water in the area.

The plant, which previously manufactured Scotchgard and now produces specialty tapes and chemicals, has a history of PFAS-related pollution issues, leading to drinking water contamination.

Despite 3M’s plans to end PFAS production by 2025 and build a $300 million water treatment system, the company is challenging the new permit requirements, claiming they are legally unjustified.

Contamination in Grand Prairie, Texas: A firefighting foam spilling Grand Prairie led to potential water contamination, affecting around 60,000 residents.

Although the foam used was said not to contain PFAS, residents were still advised to avoid using tap water due to a backflow issue, which temporarily forced businesses and schools to close.

Cape Fear River Study: A study by Cape Fear River Watch revealed fish tissue samples from the Northeast Cape Fear River contained PFOS levels 20 times higher than state standards.

PFOS, part of the PFAS family, has been linked to cancer and developmental defects.

Nearby Lear’s Textile Company, which uses PFAS in manufacturing, is now working with state regulators to phase out the chemicals.

If you or a loved one has developed cancer or other serious health conditions after exposure to PFAS-contaminated water, you may be eligible to file a PFAS water contamination lawsuit.

Contact TruLaw using the chat on this page for an instant case evaluation to determine if you qualify to join others filing in the PFAS water contamination lawsuit.

September 1st, 2024: 1,400 Gallons of Toxic Firefighting Foam Spills at Maine Airport Hangar

The AFFF Firefighting Foam Lawsuit targets manufacturers of aqueous film-forming foam (AFFF), a product widely used by firefighters.

Recently, over 1,400 gallons of firefighting foam containing toxic PFAS, also called forever chemicals, spilled accidentally at an airplane hangar in Maine.

The spill occurred due to the unexpected discharge of an outdated fire suppression system at Hangar 4, located at Brunswick Executive Airport, flooding the hangar and surrounding areas with foam.

PFAS chemicals in the foam are linked to severe health risks.

The AFFF Lawsuit aims to secure compensation for individuals affected by exposure to these dangerous substances.

In August, there were 9,525 filings within the federal AFFF MDL, increasing to 9,576 by September 1st.

If you or a loved one was exposed to firefighting foam and subsequently developed cancer, contact an attorney from TruLaw for a free, no-obligation legal consultation today and find out if you qualify for a firefighting foam lawsuit. 

You can also use the chatbot on this page to see if you qualify for legal action instantly.

August 21st, 2024: PFAS Foam Spill Contaminates Maine Nature Preserves, Reaches 8 Feet Deep in Ponds

The AFFF Lawsuit is ongoing. 

Over 1,600 gallons of firefighting foam containing harmful PFAS chemicals were accidentally discharged at the former Brunswick Naval Air Base, now operating as Brunswick Executive AIrport, due to a fire suppression system malfunction.

The foam, designed to extinguish jet fuel fires, entered the sewer and stormwater systems, leading to significant environmental contamination.

Nearby nature preserves were impacted, with foam reaching depths of four to eight feet in some ponds, according to Steve Walker from the Brunswick-Topsham Land Trust.

Cleanup efforts by the Maine Department of Environmental Protection are ongoing, but concerns remain about the long-term environmental impact, as these chemicals are known for their persistence in nature and links to serious health risks.

PFAS chemicals in AFFF are central to ongoing lawsuits, where plaintiffs seek compensation for health and environmental damages caused by these toxic substances.

The Brunswick spill could potentially contribute to the growing litigation surrounding PFAS contamination and its harmful effects on the environment and the people within it.

If you or a loved one was exposed to firefighting foam and subsequently developed cancer, contact an attorney from TruLaw for a free, no-obligation legal consultation today and find out if you qualify for a firefighting foam lawsuit. 

You can also use the chatbot on this page to see if you qualify for legal action instantly.

August 15th, 2024: Massachusetts Bans PFAS in Firefighter Gear, Sets National Precedent

The AFFF Lawsuit is ongoing.

Massachusetts Governor Maura Healey recently signed a law mandating the phase-out of PFAS chemicals in firefighters’ protective gear, marking a significant development in the ongoing Aqueous Film-Forming Foam (AFFF) litigation.

The new law, effective January 2025, requires manufacturers and sellers to disclose the presence of PFAS in firefighting equipment and justify its inclusion.

By 2027, the sale of protective gear containing intentionally-added PFAS will be prohibited.

PFAS, or perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances, are linked to serious health conditions, including various cancers.

Firefighters, who face a higher risk of developing cancer compared to the general population, have been particularly affected due to prolonged exposure to these chemicals in their gear and the use of AFFF in firefighting operations.

This legislation is likely to impact the ongoing AFFF lawsuits, which allege that PFAS exposure from firefighting foam and gear has caused significant health problems.

With Massachusetts enacting one of the nation’s strongest PFAS regulations, this law could set a precedent for similar actions in other states, potentially influencing the outcomes of AFFF-related litigation.

Firefighter unions and advocacy groups, such as the International Association of Fire Fighters (IAFF), have long campaigned against the use of PFAS in firefighting equipment due to its role in causing occupational cancers.

This new law is a direct response to those concerns and reflects a growing recognition of the dangers.

If you or a loved one was exposed to firefighting foam and subsequently developed cancer, contact an attorney from TruLaw for a free, no-obligation legal consultation today and find out if you qualify for the AFFF Lawsuit. 

You can also use the chatbot on this page to see if you qualify to file an AFFF Lawsuit instantly.

August 1st, 2024: Alaska Bans PFAS Firefighting Foam Without Governor's Signature as States Act

The AFFF Lawsuit is ongoing.

States across the nation are intensifying efforts to address the dangers of PFAS chemicals in firefighting gear and foams.

PFAS are synthetic chemicals known for their resistance to breaking down in the environment and are linked to serious health risks, including liver and kidney damage, reproductive harm, and certain cancers.

The Massachusetts State Senate has passed a bill banning PFAS in firefighter personal protective equipment (PPE), set to take effect on January 1, 2027.

This legislation aims to remove PFAS from the protective gear worn by firefighters, addressing growing concerns about the health risks associated with prolonged exposure to these chemicals.

Firefighter unions are pushing for the state’s House of Representatives to expedite the bill’s passage and present it to Governor Healey before the legislative session ends.

In Alaska, a new law requires fire departments to stop using PFAS-containing firefighting foams by January 1, 2025.

The law, which took effect without the governor’s signature, mandates a shift to PFAS-free alternatives and creates a system for rural villages to dispose of existing PFAS foams, with the state providing financial reimbursement.

This legislation reflects years of advocacy by environmental and health organizations and marks a significant step in addressing PFAS contamination, especially in areas near airports and military bases where these foams have been heavily used.

Additionally, two more fire departments in Connecticut, Stamford and Old Mystic, have joined a federal lawsuit against 3M and DuPont.

The lawsuit claims that the companies’ turnout gear used by firefighters contains PFAS chemicals that pose cancer risks.

This legal action, which includes several other Connecticut departments and firefighter unions, may be the first of its kind in the nation, highlighting the growing legal challenges faced by manufacturers of PFAS-containing products.

Regarding the AFFF Firefighting Foam MDL, the litigation saw an increase of more than 300 cases in the past month.

As of August 1, 9,525 pending AFFF lawsuits were reported by the JPML.

The transition to PFAS-free foams is crucial for mitigating further environmental and health risks.

If you or a loved one was exposed to firefighting foam and subsequently developed cancer, contact an attorney from TruLaw for a free, no-obligation legal consultation today and find out if you qualify for a firefighting foam lawsuit. 

You can also use the chatbot on this page to see if you qualify for legal action instantly.

July 26th, 2024: Senate Approves $70M for Airport PFAS Transition, 14 Times House Proposal

The AFFF Lawsuit is ongoing. 

The Senate Appropriations Committee has approved a transportation spending bill allocating $70 million to help airports transition to PFAS-free firefighting foams.

This funding is significantly higher than the House’s proposed $5 million. Congress must reconcile the differences between the two versions of the T-HUD Fiscal Year 2025 Appropriations Bill.

PFAS, known as “forever chemicals,” persist in the environment and human body and are linked to cancer, reproductive harm, and immune system damage.

Aqueous film-forming foam (AFFF) used in firefighting contains PFAS and can contaminate water supplies near airports.

Earlier this year, the Federal Aviation Administration reauthorization law established a five-year, $350 million grant program to aid airports in transitioning away from PFAS-containing foams.

The Senate T-HUD bill fully funds the program’s first year at $70 million and allocates $4.52 billion for airport infrastructure and safety improvements, and emissions reductions.

PFAS-free firefighting foams have been available since 2019, with over 100 fluorine-free options from 24 manufacturers meeting international aviation standards.

These alternatives are safe, effective, and ready for adoption by the military and U.S. airports.

Decades of using PFAS-laden foams have contaminated drinking and groundwater near airports.

The transition to PFAS-free foams is crucial for mitigating further environmental and health risks.

If you or a loved one was exposed to firefighting foam and subsequently developed cancer, contact an attorney from TruLaw for a free, no-obligation legal consultation today and find out if you qualify for a firefighting foam lawsuit.

July 23rd, 2024: Federal Judge Selects 9 AFFF Cancer Cases for Trial to Speed Settlements

The AFFF Lawsuit is ongoing. 

The federal judge overseeing the Firefighting Foam MDL has selected nine cases involving Pennsylvania residents with kidney or testicular cancer and Colorado residents with thyroid cancer or ulcerative colitis to go to trial.

Other key developments in the AFFF Lawsuit include:

  • The Plaintiffs’ strategy reduced the number of required depositions and expert reports.
  • Lawyers are pushing for more trial dates to expedite settlements.
  • The Air Force is transitioning to a fluorine-free formulation (F3) in response to the AFFF Lawsuit.
  • The Department of Defense is said to be “behind” on its goal to phase out AFFF.

If you or a loved one was exposed to firefighting foam and subsequently developed cancer, contact TruLaw for a free, no-obligation consultation today and find out if you qualify for the AFFF Lawsuit. 

You can also use the chatbot on this page to see if you qualify to file an AFFF Lawsuit instantly.

July 12th, 2024: Army Refuses EPA PFAS Testing Request at Superfund Site Despite County Lawsuit

On June 25, 2024, a mechanical malfunction at the Alaska Army National Guard Aviation Facility in Bethel led to a release of aqueous film-forming foam (AFFF) containing PFAS chemicals.

Approximately ten gallons of AFFF were discharged due to a fire suppression system failure, affecting the facility’s boiler room, hangar bay floor, and a small area outside.

The Alaska National Guard environmental team is hiring a PFAS-trained contractor for sample testing and ongoing site monitoring.

The Seneca Army Depot, now a Superfund site, has known PFAS contamination in its groundwater from historical AFFF use.

Despite the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) request for PFAS testing in nearby creeks, the Army has not planned immediate testing, opting to sample off-base receptors only if PFAS migration is observed.

Following consultations with the Army, the EPA removed the testing request from its website but continues discussions on PFAS remediation with the Army Corps of Engineers.

Seneca County has filed a lawsuit against the federal government, alleging PFAS contamination from the depot has damaged its drinking water supply.

The lawsuit claims that decades of AFFF use at the depot have contaminated the water supply with PFAS compounds.

The Waterloo water plant’s 2023 report shows PFOA levels at 4.24 ppt, disputing the higher contamination levels cited in the lawsuit.

The plant is upgrading its filtering systems to address PFAS contamination, with costs expected to exceed $12 million.

If you or a loved one have suffered from health problems related to AFFF exposure, you may qualify to pursue compensation.

Contact TruLaw using the chat on this page to determine if you qualify for filing an AFFF Firefighting Foam Lawsuit.

July 9th, 2024: DOD Faces $2.1 Billion Bill to Phase Out Toxic AFFF by October Deadline

The AFFF lawsuit is ongoing.

The Department of Defense (DOD) is actively working to eliminate the use of aqueous film-forming foam (AFFF) at its installations due to the significant health risks posed by per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) found in AFFF.

PFAS exposure has been linked to adverse health effects, including impacts on fetal development, the immune system, the thyroid, liver damage, and cancer.

Under the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020, the DOD must discontinue the use of AFFF by October 1, 2024, with possible waivers extending to October 1, 2026, except for shipboard use.

The DOD has developed plans and schedules for replacing AFFF in all land-based mobile assets and facilities worldwide.

This includes creating specifications for a fluorine-free foam alternative to meet fire extinguishing performance standards.

However, the transition faces several challenges, including compatibility issues with existing firefighting systems, substantial funding requirements estimated at over $2.1 billion, and the need for extensive training for DOD firefighters in the use of fluorine-free foams.

Despite these obstacles, the DOD remains committed to phasing out AFFF and transitioning to safer alternatives.

If you or a loved one have suffered from health problems related to AFFF exposure, you may qualify to pursue compensation.

Contact TruLaw using the chat on this page to determine if you qualify for filing an AFFF Firefighting Foam Lawsuit.

July 1st, 2024: AFFF Lawsuits Surge Nearly 1,000 Cases in One Month, Reach 9,198 Total

The AFFF lawsuit is ongoing.

The AFFF lawsuit addresses claims related to aqueous film-forming foam (AFFF) used in firefighting, which contains harmful chemicals called per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS).

These chemicals are linked to severe health issues, including cancer.

In June, there were 8,270 AFFF lawsuit filings.

By July, this number increased to 9,198.

PFAS in AFFF persists in the environment and human body, causing long-term health problems such as cancer, liver damage, and immune system issues.

Firefighters and exposed communities are at significant risk, leading to more individuals joining the AFFF lawsuit.

If you or a loved one have suffered from health problems related to AFFF exposure, you may qualify to pursue compensation.

Contact TruLaw using the chat on this page to determine if you qualify for filing an AFFF Firefighting Foam Lawsuit.

June 26th, 2024: Connecticut Firefighters Sue DuPont, 3M Over Toxic PFAS in Protective Gear

The Firefighting Foam lawsuit is ongoing. 

Connecticut firefighters, represented by the Uniformed Professional Fire Fighters Association of Connecticut, filed a class action lawsuit against DuPont, 3M, Honeywell, and 16 other defendants.

The lawsuit claims that the protective gear used by firefighters was contaminated with per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), also known as “forever chemicals,” which are linked to cancer.

The lawsuit, filed in the New Haven federal court, targets firefighter gear containing PFAS.

Plaintiffs, including five other unions and five individual firefighters, allege that PFAS in jackets, pants, and other turnout gear were absorbed through the skin, ingestion, and inhalation.

This absorption rate increases with rising temperatures and sweat buildup, leading to an increased risk of adverse health conditions.

The lawsuit demands at least $5 million in damages for violations of Connecticut product liability law.

DuPont and 3M produced the PFAS used in the gear, while a Honeywell subsidiary sold the gear without warning firefighters of the risks.

DuPont stated the lawsuit is without merit, while 3M indicated its intention to defend itself or settle as appropriate.

Honeywell did not respond to requests for comment.

PFAS, used in many products, are dubbed “forever chemicals” because they do not break down easily in the human body or the environment and have been linked to various health issues.

If you or a loved one have suffered from health problems related to AFFF exposure, you may qualify to pursue compensation.

Contact TruLaw using the chat on this page to determine if you qualify for filing an AFFF Firefighting Foam Lawsuit.

June 11th, 2024: Federal Judge Approves $750M Tyco Settlement for PFAS Water Contamination

The AFFF lawsuit is ongoing.

A provisional $750 million settlement has been approved by a federal judge in South Carolina, involving Tyco Fire Products LP, a Johnson Controls International PLC subsidiary.

This settlement addresses claims from public water systems regarding PFAS contamination, which allegedly stems from Tyco’s aqueous film-forming foam (AFFF) products used in firefighting.

This settlement is part of a broader multidistrict litigation (MDL) which includes substantial settlements, such as a $12.5 billion agreement with 3M Co. and a $1.2 billion agreement involving DuPont, Chemours, and Corteva.

The class eligible for this settlement consists of public water systems that had detected PFAS in their water sources by mid-May.

The MDL encompasses over 10,000 cases related to PFAS damage claims.

While this settlement resolves some issues, it does not conclude all claims within the larger AFFF litigation, leaving several categories of claims outstanding.

These unresolved claims include requests from public water providers for water testing and remediation, claims from individuals who have experienced health issues from AFFF exposure, requests for medical monitoring, property owners seeking contamination cleanup costs, and states claiming damages to natural resources.

If you or a loved one have suffered from health problems related to AFFF exposure, you may qualify to pursue compensation.

Contact TruLaw using the chat on this page to determine if you qualify for filing an AFFF Firefighting Foam Lawsuit.

June 3rd, 2024: Battelle's "Annihilator" Offers Hope for PFAS Cleanup at Military Sites

The AFFF lawsuit is ongoing. 

In the AFFF lawsuit, plaintiffs claim significant harm from PFAS chemicals, historically used in firefighting foams by the US Military and various airports.

This past month, AFFF lawyers added 209 new cases to the Multidistrict Litigation (MDL) related to the AFFF lawsuit, bringing the total to 8,270 pending cases as of June 1st.

PFAS, the toxic chemicals in AFFF, are linked to severe health risks including cancer, liver damage, and immune system disruption.

A key concern is the PFAS contamination of water sources, especially around US Military installations, due to AFFF usage.

Recent technological breakthroughs, such as Battelle’s “The Annihilator,” uses supercritical water oxidation, offering promising methods for destroying PFAS in contaminated sites and firefighting foams.

These advancements in remediation technology are essential for effectively eliminating PFAS from affected environments.

If you or a loved one have suffered from health problems related to AFFF exposure, you may qualify to pursue compensation.

Contact TruLaw using the chat on this page to determine if you qualify for filing an AFFF Firefighting Foam Lawsuit.

May 15th, 2024: Senate Passes $105 Billion Bill with $350M to Remove Toxic AFFF Foam from Airports

The AFFF lawsuit is ongoing.

A significant $105 billion omnibus bill, now including $350 million for a grant program, aims to eliminate toxic AFFF foam at airports nationwide, including in New York.

The U.S. Senate has passed this bill, which is pending approval by the House. Its primary objective is to assist airports in replacing hazardous AFFF firefighting foam with safer alternatives.

The AFFF PFAS Replacement Program for Airports will allocate federal funding for airports to adopt PFAS-free foams, clean equipment, and conduct necessary training for personnel.

PFAS chemicals, often referred to as “forever chemicals,” are notorious for their persistence in the environment and their association with serious health issues such as cancer and thyroid disorders.

The Capital Region, and particularly Hoosick Falls, has faced significant AFFF PFAS pollution, prompting state-led investigations and subsequent settlements.

Following a 2023 ruling by the EPA, it has been established that no level of PFAS is considered safe in drinking water, leading to calls for strict regulatory limits.

Furthermore, the aviation legislation strengthens consumer rights, including enhanced refund policies for passengers on delayed flights.

In related developments, San Francisco is poised to be the first city to prohibit PFAS in firefighter gear, with a mandate for the San Francisco Fire Department to transition to PFAS-free uniforms by June 30, 2026.

May 6th, 2024: AFFF Lawsuit Affects 60 Million Americans in 5,000 Communities Nationwide

The AFFF lawsuit is ongoing. 

The AFFF lawsuit emphasizes significant environmental and health risks tied to PFAS (per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances) due to their persistent nature in the environment, often termed “forever chemicals.”

Key points of the AFFF lawsuit involve claims against 3M and other manufacturers for not disclosing the hazardous effects of PFAS, which research has connected to cancer and other severe health issues.

The Department of Defense initiated the use of PFAS-containing foams in the 1970s, primarily to extinguish oil and gas fires at military and airport locations.

ABC news reports revealed that it took decades to recognize the scale of PFAS water contamination, subsequently found widespread in public water systems across the United States.

Communities affected by PFAS number 5,000 across all 50 states, posing health risks to 60 million Americans.

The ongoing legal efforts demand that PFAS manufacturers finance the extensive clean-up operations required.

Proposed remedial measures include installing advanced water filtration systems to eliminate PFAS from contaminated water supplies, an essential yet expensive endeavor to protect public health.

Technological advancements in firefighting have introduced PFAS-free foams, with multiple new products claiming to be fluorine-free.

These products are capable of effectively extinguishing liquid fuel fires, despite requiring greater volumes under ideal conditions due to variations in “foam quality.”

TruLaw is actively seeking new clients for the AFFF lawsuit, focusing on individuals likely exposed to AFFF, including military service members, firefighters, and airport workers. 

If you or someone you know has been exposed to AFFF and suffered health consequences contact us for a free consultation.

Alternatively, use the chatbot on our page for an instant AFFF lawsuit evaluation. 

May 1st, 2024: AFFF Lawsuit Total Reaches 8,061 Cases with 300 New Filings Added

The AFFF lawsuit is ongoing. 

The multidistrict litigation (MDL) now includes over 300 new AFFF Lawsuits, bringing the total to 8,061 pending cases, as noted in the latest reports from the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation (JPML).

Aqueous film-forming foam has been extensively employed in firefighting efforts, notably at both military and civilian airports.

Plaintiffs allege that exposure to per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) through AFFF resulted in severe health consequences, including various forms of cancer.

Firefighters, military personnel, and airport workers are identified as the primary groups adversely affected by exposure to AFFF.

If you or a loved one has been exposed to AFFF, call us today for a free consultation.

Or use the chatbot on this page for an instant case evaluation.

April 15th, 2024: Tyco Fire Products Agrees to $750 Million PFAS Water Contamination Settlement

Tyco Fire Products has reached a $750 million settlement in litigation concerning the contamination of public water systems by PFAS (per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances), found in firefighting foams.

PFAS chemicals are notorious for their environmental persistence and their potential to cause severe health issues, including cancer.

This settlement aligns with previous agreements involving companies like 3M and Dupont, highlighting the ongoing legal efforts to address the environmental and health dangers posed by these substances.

The deal, which is awaiting approval from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, is intended to fund improvements to water treatment infrastructure.

This settlement pertains specifically to public water systems affected by PFAS in firefighting foam.

Meanwhile, the broader AFFF lawsuit, addressing personal injuries and cancer claims, continues and remains unresolved.

Our law firm continues to take on new clients for the AFFF lawsuit.

For a free consultation, contact us or use the chatbot on this page to immediately find out if you are eligible to participate in the AFFF lawsuit.

April 1st, 2024: AFFF Lawsuits Jump to 7,738 Cases as 568 New Filings Added in One Month

The Aqueous Film Forming Foam (AFFF) litigation landscape is evolving rapidly.

The latest filings from the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation (JPML) indicating a total of 7,738 lawsuits pending consolidation as of April 1st.

This marks a notable increase from the 7,170 cases reported just a month earlier, on March 1st.

The surge in litigation activity is attributed primarily to increased awareness among affected individuals about their legal options for seeking compensation due to exposure to firefighting foam.

AFFF has been widely utilized across various military branches and by firefighting units for its effectiveness in extinguishing fuel-based fires.

Despite its utility, the foam’s chemical components, particularly Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS), have come under scrutiny for potential adverse health effects.

The core of the ongoing lawsuits revolves around allegations that exposure to AFFF, and consequently PFAS, is associated with several serious health conditions.

Individuals with prolonged exposure to AFFF, notably firefighters and military personnel, are reportedly at higher risk and have been instrumental in bringing these issues to light.

For individuals who believe they have suffered health problems as a result of AFFF exposure, legal counsel is advised to explore possible compensation avenues.

Our law firm offers free consultations to evaluate potential cases related to AFFF exposure. 

Interested parties are encouraged to reach out through our website’s chatbot for immediate assistance or to arrange a consultation with our specialized AFFF attorneys.

March 21st, 2024: AFFF Lawsuit Enters "Science Day" Phase to Examine Cancer Link Evidence

The AFFF Lawsuit continues to progress, and our AFFF Lawyers are accepting clients from all 50 states. 

The focus of the AFFF (Aqueous Film-Forming Foam) legal battle is currently on setting up a procedural structure to examine the scientific claims that the foam’s chemicals are linked to liver and thyroid cancer.

A pivotal event in this phase is the “Science Day,” scheduled to brief the MDL (Multidistrict Litigation) judge on pertinent scientific and medical evidence pivotal to these claims.

The lawsuit’s current stage involves choosing specific cases of liver and thyroid cancer to undergo the bellwether process.

This process mimics trial scenarios to gauge how a jury might react to the presented evidence and testimonials.

A critical part of this stage is the deadline set for both parties to share scientific studies that either support or dispute the claims of cancer linked to AFFF exposure.

These exchanges will culminate in the Science Day presentations.

After the Science Day, a 60-day period is allocated to outline a comprehensive plan for moving forward with the bellwether trials.

This follows a significant settlement where the 3M Company agreed to pay over $10.3 billion to resolve water contamination claims from local water suppliers.

However, the cancer claims related to AFFF exposure are still unresolved.

Individuals who have been exposed to AFFF and have since developed cancer or other health issues might be eligible to participate in the AFFF Lawsuit.

TruLaw offers free consultations to those affected. 

Alternatively, our ChatBot is available to immediately assist in determining your eligibility for the AFFF lawsuit. 

March 6th, 2024: 7,170 AFFF Lawsuits Awaiting Consolidation as 176 New Cases Added Monthly

The AFFF Lawsuit is ongoing.

As of the latest filings by the JPML, there are currently 7,170 lawsuits regarding Aqueous Film-Forming Foam (AFFF) waiting to be combined.

In the United States, Multidistrict Litigations (MDLs) serve as a mechanism to efficiently manage multiple civil lawsuits that share common issues, facts, or defendants.

These litigations often involve a large number of plaintiffs who have filed lawsuits under similar circumstances, such as cases of product liability, pharmaceuticals, or mass torts, and allow for the consolidation of these cases in a single federal district court for the purpose of pretrial proceedings.

The goal of the AFFF MDLs is to make the litigation process more efficient by centralizing the discovery phase, minimizing repetitive efforts, and ensuring uniform decisions on crucial legal matters.

The recent addition of 176 cases over the past month highlights the ongoing growth of the AFFF MDL initiative.

While a settlement has previously been reached concerning water contamination issues, legal actions regarding individual exposure to AFFF continue.

If you or someone close to you has experienced harm due to AFFF, understanding your legal rights is crucial. 

You can use the chatbot on this page to instantly check if you qualify for the AFFF lawsuit.

February 1st, 2024: Connecticut Attorney General Sues 28 Chemical Manufacturers Over PFAS Contamination

Connecticut’s Attorney General has initiated two legal actions targeting 28 chemical manufacturers, accusing them of deliberate contamination of the state’s water and natural resources through the use of PFAS chemicals.

These lawsuits are designed to establish the companies’ responsibility for PFAS pollution stemming from two primary sources: the use of Aqueous film-forming foam (AFFF) in firefighting and the incorporation of PFAS in the production of consumer goods such as food packaging, cookware, carpeting, upholstery, clothing, and cosmetics.

PFAS chemicals are notorious for their long-lasting presence in the environment and their association with severe health issues, including various forms of cancer, liver damage, birth defects, elevated cholesterol levels, infertility, and diabetes.

The primary objectives of these legal actions are to secure both injunctive and monetary relief.

This would entail compelling the companies to dispose of their hazardous chemical inventories, mitigate pollution within Connecticut, disclose their research findings, and reimburse the state for expenses related to remediation and testing.

Additionally, the complaints seek penalties for breaches of state laws extending back several decades.

These companies are alleged to have possessed knowledge about the toxicity and enduring nature of PFAS since the 1950s, yet they allegedly failed to safeguard the public interest, resulting in widespread contamination.

Although Connecticut has already taken measures to ban PFAS use in firefighting foam and food packaging, the state is still grappling with the consequences of PFAS pollution.

The lawsuits underscore contamination across various water systems and demand accountability from the chemical manufacturers held responsible for the environmental harm.

In essence, these legal actions symbolize Connecticut’s commitment to addressing the grave health and environmental repercussions associated with PFAS contamination while holding the responsible parties answerable for their actions.

January 1st, 2024: AFFF MDL Judge Grants Extension Until January 31st for Discovery Dispute Talks

The MDL judge recently granted a joint motion, allowing an extension for the parties to conduct discussions on an ongoing discovery dispute and a motion to compel.

The extended deadline for these discussions is now January 31st.

December 28th, 2023: Hawaii AG Sues 25 AFFF Manufacturers Over PFAS Health Risk Cover-Up

Hawaii’s Attorney General, Anne E. Lopez, has initiated legal proceedings against 25 manufacturers of firefighting foam products containing harmful per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS).

In this lawsuit, it is alleged that these companies breached state consumer protection and tort laws by concealing the environmental and human health risks associated with PFAS products, all while profiting from their sale.

The lawsuit aims to hold these defendants accountable for all expenses related to PFAS, encompassing testing, treatment, and monitoring of the state’s natural resources.

It seeks compensation for residents who have suffered losses due to natural resource damage, disposal costs, civil penalties, restitution, disgorgement, punitive damages, and other remedies.

This legal action by Hawaii’s AG is the latest in a series of actions taken against AFFF manufacturers, joining the numerous claims filed by individuals who have been exposed to PFAS.

December 1st, 2023: AFFF MDL Focuses on Telomer Water Cases Not Covered by August Settlement

The AFFF class action MDL is centered on the Telomer water provider cases, a subgroup of water contamination issues.

Recent orders and rulings specifically pertain to this subgroup, not covered by the August water contamination settlement.

Regrettably, this focus suggests a potential delay for the remaining individual cancer cases.

November 28th, 2023: 3 AFFF Plaintiffs Die Awaiting Justice as Water Cases Dominate Docket

Water contamination lawsuits have dominated the AFFF class action docket, leading to some frustration.

The delay’s severe consequences are underscored by the submission of three “Suggestion of Death” notices in the MDL, signifying the passing of three plaintiffs awaiting justice.

These notices formally inform the court and involved parties about a party’s demise in the lawsuit, initiating the process of substituting the deceased with a representative from their estate, typically the executor or administrator.

November 3rd, 2023: Delaware AG Sues 3M and 13 Other Companies Over AFFF "Forever Chemicals"

Kathy Jennings, the Attorney General of Delaware, has taken legal action against 14 companies, including 3M, for their production of firefighting foam containing “forever chemicals,” allegedly resulting in soil and aquifer contamination within the state.

The lawsuit claims that these companies, involved in manufacturing aqueous film-forming foam (AFFF), introduced PFAS into the environment, leading to harm and health hazards for residents.

Before filing the lawsuit, the state conducted a comprehensive two-year investigation involving environmental sampling and scrutiny of corporate records.

Building on Delaware’s prior success in securing a $50 million settlement related to PFAS products from companies associated with DuPont, which led to over $1.1 billion in commitments nationwide to settle PFAS-related claims, the current lawsuit aims for monetary damages, compensation for natural resources, and funding for testing and addressing contamination arising from the defendants’ PFAS-containing firefighting products.

The lawsuit specifically outlines alleged efforts by the companies, especially 3M, to hide the dangers of PFAS and their products.

It asserts that 3M was aware of PFAS risks dating back to the 1950s and intentionally misled the public.

3M has stated its intent to defend itself in court and is taking steps to address PFAS concerns by remediation, investment in water treatment, and working in collaboration with affected communities.

Additionally, the case targets the remaining 12 companies, indicating that they likely knew about PFAS risks through industry groups and should have been aware of potential dangers associated with their products.

The lawsuit underscores the responsibility of these companies for the environmental and health impacts caused by their PFAS-containing firefighting foams.

November 1st, 2023: AFFF Personal Injury Cases Face November 14th Deadline for Bellwether Pool

In the coming weeks, parties involved in Aqueous Film-Forming Foam personal injury cases will choose which cases will be part of the bellwether discovery pool.

They have until November 14, 2023, to share their lists of potential plaintiffs for the bellwether trials.

The selected plaintiffs will undergo case-specific fact discovery, leading to the final selection of individuals for the personal injury bellwether trials.

October 27th, 2023: New Study Links PFAS Exposure to 56% Higher Thyroid Cancer Risk

A recent study conducted a nested case-control investigation, examining patients with thyroid cancer by analyzing plasma samples taken before or at the time of their cancer diagnosis.

This study comprised 88 thyroid cancer patients, each carefully matched with 88 healthy controls based on various factors.

The study’s results indicated a 56% higher likelihood of thyroid cancer diagnosis linked to elevated levels of perfluorooctanesulfonic acid (n-PFOS).

This positive association remained statistically significant when focusing on a subgroup of thyroid cancer cases diagnosed one year or more after plasma sample collection.

These findings imply a potential link between PFAS exposure and an increased risk of (papillary) thyroid cancer, a matter of global concern given the widespread prevalence of PFAS exposure.

October 1st, 2023: Air Force Study Links PFOS Blood Levels to Higher Testicular Cancer Risk

A recent study led by Mark Purdue, Ph.D., at the Uniformed Services University explored the link between blood levels of perfluorooctanesulfonic acid (PFOS), a type of PFAS chemical, and testicular cancer among active-duty Air Force servicemen.

The study found that elevated PFOS blood levels were associated with a higher risk of testicular cancer.

This research, published in July 2023, is the first to investigate this relationship using blood measurements within a military population.

Further research is needed to explore PFOS exposure and testicular cancer risk in highly exposed populations.

September 19th, 2023: 6,000 AFFF Lawsuits in MDL as Municipalities Near $10.3 Billion Water Settlement

There are now a total of 6,000 separate AFFF Lawsuits consolidated within the multidistrict litigation (MDL).

Municipalities are on the verge of reaching a global settlement valued at more than $10.3 billion for AFFF Lawsuits related to water contamination.

This settlement would cover the expenses associated with cleaning up and addressing contamination caused by AFFF products in local water supplies throughout the country.

Municipalities are pleased with this settlement agreement, as it means that the responsibility for cleanup costs falls on the companies responsible for the pollution rather than on the residents affected by it.

Now, the spotlight remains on individuals who have initiated AFFF Lawsuits against the same group of manufacturers, asserting that their health issues are a result of exposure to AFFF fire fighting foam.

August 20th, 2023: URO Today Study Links Military Firefighting PFAS to Testicular Cancer

A recent study published in URO Today investigated the link between serum concentrations of PFAS and testicular germ cell tumors (TGCT) in U.S. Air Force servicemen.

They found that elevated concentrations of certain PFAS were associated with military employment in firefighting and service at bases with high PFAS concentrations in drinking water.

Specifically, elevated perfluorooctanesulfonic acid (PFOS) concentrations in the second sample were positively linked to TGCT.

August 18th, 2023: Former Air Force Firefighter Files Prostate Cancer Lawsuit Against 3M in AFFF MDL

Jones v. 3M, et al., has been recently filed directly within the AFFF  MDL in South Carolina.

The plaintiff, a 73-year-old former Air Force firefighter from Texas, alleges exposure to fluorochemical products during his service, leading to a diagnosis of prostate cancer and subsequent prostatectomy.

August 1st, 2023: Judge Gergel Approves Daughter's Replacement of Deceased Alabama AFFF Plaintiff

Judge Gergel approved an unopposed motion to replace a plaintiff in a lawsuit after the original Alabama plaintiff passed away.

The deceased plaintiff’s daughter has now taken over as the new plaintiff and filed a wrongful death lawsuit.

July 17th, 2023: AFFF MDL Sees Record 493 New Cases in One Month, Highest Since Inception

In the past month, 493 new cases were consolidated into the AFFF class action MDL, representing the highest monthly volume since the litigation’s inception.

This increase follows the recent global settlement announcement for water contamination cases.

However, the breakdown between water contamination and cancer cases remains unclear.

The MDL now encompasses over 5,000 pending cases.

June 1st, 2023: First AFFF Bellwether Trial Postponed as City of Stuart Reaches Settlement with 3M

The initial bellwether test trial in the AFFF class action MDL, City of Stuart v. 3M Co. et al. case, was originally set to begin on June 5, 2023.

The lawsuit pertains to allegations that AFFF contaminated the municipal water system in Stuart, Florida.

However, the trial was postponed due to the PFAS manufacturers reaching a settlement in the case.

The class action MDL received an additional 300 AFFF firefighting foam lawsuits last month, resulting in a total of 4,793 claims now pending in the multidistrict litigation.

May 12th, 2023: First AFFF Test Trial Begins with City of Stuart v. 3M Water Contamination Case

The first test trial in the firefighting foam class action MDL begins with the case of City of Stuart v. 3M Co., et al.

The trial centers around allegations that PFAS from firefighting foam products contaminated Stuart’s water supply.

The defendants argue that there is no evidence linking their products to the contamination.

The trial outcome holds significance for the litigation, potentially resulting in a multi-billion dollar global settlement if the defendants face a substantial loss.

May 9th, 2023: Judge Denies Defense Summary Judgment Motion, AFFF Bellwether Trial Proceeds to Jury

As the bellwether trial approaches, the defense submits its final List of Trial Exhibits, trial brief, and deposition designations.

The MDL Judge denies the defense motion for summary judgment, ensuring that the jury will decide the bulk of the plaintiffs’ claims in the upcoming trial.

May 7th, 2023: Judge Schedules Hearing to Address AFFF Trial Exhibit Objections

Objections regarding trial exhibits arise, leading to a hearing scheduled to address these evidence-related disputes.

The judge requires lead counsel to personally argue each objection, aiming to narrow down baseless objections.

May 2nd, 2023: NIST Study Finds PFAS in Firefighting Equipment Textiles, Raises Cancer Risk Concerns

The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) releases research on the presence of PFAS in firefighting equipment textiles, revealing the existence of PFAS in various gear materials.

The findings prompt discussions on the potential transfer of PFAS from equipment to firefighters and their increased cancer risk.

May 1st, 2023: Judge Sets Deadline for AFFF Parties to Submit Deposition Excerpts and Evidence

The judge sets a deadline for the parties involved in the litigation to submit chosen parts of depositions and a list of evidence they plan to use in the upcoming trial.

April 1st, 2023: New AFFF Cases Continue Filing as Previous PFAS Settlements Range $17.5M to $4B

There are still new cases being filed while AFFF lawsuits filed against PFAS-containing firefighting foam increase in number.

While plaintiffs await their trial, it’s important to remember that there have been several PFAS settlements in the past already, which range from a $17.5 million class action settlement to a $4 billion settlement.

March 16th, 2023: 354 New AFFF Cases Push Total to 4,058 as Lawyers Anticipate Settlement

It was reported that 354 new cases were added to the firefighting foam class action MDL in the last month, bringing the total number of pending cases to 4,058.

This marks the second month in a row with higher than average volume of new filings, suggesting that lawyers may be anticipating a settlement and trying to get cases filed before it happens.

March 7th, 2023: Judge Gergel Orders on Kent AFFF Case Transfer Request to Texas District Court

A firefighting foam lawsuit was filed by Kent against 3M, and Judge Richard M. Gergel, the AFFF class action lawsuit judge in South Carolina, issued the order.

The plaintiff’s lawsuit asks that the case be transferred to the Southern District of Texas because the events or omissions leading to the claim occurred in Texas.

March 2nd, 2023: Marine Corps Firefighter Files New AFFF Prostate Cancer Lawsuit in South Carolina

A new lawsuit was filed in South Carolina by a 62-year-old Deer Park, Texas man named Kent, who was exposed to fluorochemical products during his service as a firefighter in the United States Marine Corps.

Kent was diagnosed with prostate cancer and underwent prostatectomy, and he claims that the exposure to the fluorochemical products caused him personal injuries, pain, suffering, and emotional distress.

The plaintiff’s lawyers filed the complaint in accordance with Case Management Order No. 3, which designates the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas as the “home venue” for the case.

February 23rd, 2023: Science Direct Study Links PFAS AFFF to Six Cancer Types in Firefighters

A recent article authored by eight leading scientist was published in Science Direct in December 2022 and cited over seventy other studies in support of their position.

Due to the persistence of PFASs in the human body and their ability to bioaccumulate, firefighters experience cumulative effects of PFAS-containing AFFF exposure throughout their careers, increasing their risk of developing thyroid, kidney, bladder, testicular, prostate and colon cancers.

The study suggests that PFASs may contribute to firefighter cancers, and further research is needed to evaluate the role of occupational PFAS exposure in causing an elevated cancer risk for firefighters.

February 17th, 2023: 317 New AFFF Cases Since January 15th Push Total to 3,704 in MDL

Since January 15th, 317 new firefighting foam AFFF lawsuits were added to the MDL, bringing the total number of pending cases up to 3,704.

The monthly average of new cases for this MDL in 2022 was 175, so this month was almost double that.

We don’t know how many of these new cases are municipal water contamination cases versus personal injury claims.

February 16th, 2023: AFFF Daubert Rulings Coming Soon as June 5th Stuart v. 3M Trial Approaches

Rulings with respect to the admissibility of scientific evidence in initial drinking water utility lawsuits involving damages caused by firefighting foam containing PFAS will be forthcoming soon.

The first bellwether trial, City of Stuart v. 3M Co., has been scheduled for June 5, and the parties are currently in the final stages of presenting arguments regarding the Daubert standard, which is the criteria that the US District Court for the District of South Carolina should use to evaluate scientific testimony and evidence.

These rulings could impact the admissibility of certain scientific evidence in the cancer lawsuits.

February 13th, 2023: AFFF Judge to Rule on Daubert Motions for Scientific Evidence in City of Stuart Trial

The AFFF MDL Judge is set to make critical rulings on Daubert motions challenging the admissibility of scientific evidence in City of Stuart v. 3M Co., et al. (the first bellwether trial set for June).

The City of Stuart is a water supply contamination case, not a personal injury case involving claims that exposure to AFFF caused cancer.

However, the Daubert rulings on causation evidence in the City of Stuart will still have some applicability to what scientific evidence will be allowed in AFFF cancer cases.

The personal injury cases will participate in a separate bellwether trial program after the water supply trials.

February 3rd, 2023: AFFF Victims May Still Have Valid Claims Despite Believing Statute of Limitations Expired

Many victims do not contact us because they believe the statute of limitation deadline to file a lawsuit bars their claim.

They correctly assume that the statute of limitations for filing an AFFF (Aqueous Film-Forming Foam) lawsuit is typically 2-3 years from the date of injury in most states.

But most states have a discovery rule that is critical to extending the deadline to file an AFFF lawsuit.

In other words, the time limit for filing a personal injury lawsuit does not start until the plaintiff becomes aware of the injury and its connection to the defendant’s negligence.

The statute of limitations and discovery rule are complicated, with scores of exceptions.

But many victims looking to file an AFFF lawsuit call us believing they likely do not have a claim in 2023 when they absolutely do.

January 1st, 2023: Mansfield, Ohio Sues 3M, DuPont Over AFFF Drinking Water Contamination

The AFFF Lawsuit is ongoing and law firms are accepting clients daily.

Similar to previous lawsuits filed for PFAS contamination, the City of Mansfield, Ohio is filing suit against 3M, DuPont, Chemours, Tyco Fire Products and Chemguard for AFFF contamination of local drinking water.

The contamination stems from use by the Ohio Air National Guard at the local airport.

If you or a loved one were exposed to AFFF and subsequently suffered health problems, you may be eligible to file suit.

Contact us for a free consultation or use the chatbot on this page to see if you qualify for the Firefighting Foam Lawsuit instantly.

AFFF and Cancer Connection

AFFF and Cancer Connection

Exploring the link between AFFF exposure and cancer development

AFFF, or aqueous film-forming foam, is a concern in the firefighting community due to the health risks from PFAS contamination.

PFAS are man-made chemicals found in AFFF and can accumulate in the body over time.

Studies suggest a potential link between AFFF exposure and certain cancers in firefighters, but more research is needed and helped by AFFF firefighting foam lawsuit.

PFAS chemicals also have other health effects, like liver damage and immune system dysfunction.

Firefighters should be aware of these risks and take steps to minimize exposure, such as using PFAS-free foams and proper disposal of toxic firefighting foam AFFF.

Understanding the types of cancers associated with AFFF exposure

Several scientific studies have provided valuable insights into the association between AFFF and cancer.

For example, a study conducted by researchers at the Disease Control Institute analyzed data from firefighters who regularly used firefighting foams containing PFAS, including AFFF.

The results showed a higher incidence of kidney cancer among these firefighters compared to those who were not exposed to such foam products.

Another study published in the Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine found an increased risk of prostate cancer among firefighters with occupational exposure to firefighting foam containing PFAS, like AFFF.

It is important to note that PFAS chemicals, commonly found in many firefighting foams, including AFFF, can pose a risk to firefighters due to their potential adverse effects on personal health.

These carcinogenic substances raise concerns about the water firefighters use to extinguish fires and the potential for personal injury.

While more research is needed for conclusive evidence, it is crucial for firefighters and individuals working in firefighting professions involving AFFF foam usage to be aware of the potential health risks associated with firefighting and fire suppression.

Regular medical check-ups and monitoring for early signs of cancer can help in the timely diagnosis and treatment of any related medical issues, including PFAS contamination.

Involvement of AFFF Lawyers in Lawsuit

Involvement of AFFF Lawyers in Lawsuit

AFFF lawyer represent firefighters affected by AFFF contamination.

They specialize in lawsuits related to the harmful effects of AFFF.

Their goal is to ensure justice and compensation for their firefighter clients.

AFFF contains toxic substances that can cause health issues such as cancer and organ damage.

AFFF lawyer are knowledgeable about the scientific research linking AFFF exposure to health problems.

They gather evidence and consult experts to build strong cases.

Their aim is to hold responsible parties accountable and secure compensation for their clients’ medical expenses, lost wages, and other damages.

Building Strong Cases Against Responsible Parties

Firefighting foam lawsuit lawyers have the main responsibility of gathering evidence and building strong cases against those at fault.

They investigate each case thoroughly, collecting relevant documents, interviewing firefighters, and consulting with fire suppression experts.

This helps them establish a clear connection between their clients’ injuries or damages and the use of AFFF.

In these lawsuits, they often work with firefighters, environmental experts, medical professionals, and other specialists to assess the harm caused by exposure to AFFF chemicals.

Successful Lawsuits Handled by Experienced AFFF Lawyers

One of the key achievements of these AFFF lawyers is securing substantial compensation for victims who have suffered personal injuries due to exposure to firefighting foam chemicals.

Through their diligent efforts, these lawyers have been able to obtain compensation that not only covers medical expenses but also provides financial support for ongoing treatment and recovery.

This financial assistance is crucial in helping affected firefighters cope with the physical, emotional, and financial burdens caused by their exposure to PFAS.

Moreover, AFFF lawyers have been instrumental in holding responsible parties accountable for their actions.

By filing lawsuits and pursuing legal action, these attorneys ensure that companies and organizations involved in the manufacturing, distribution, or use of AFFF are held liable for the harm caused to individuals and communities.

This accountability serves as a deterrent and encourages companies to prioritize the safety and well-being of firefighters and the general public.

The victories achieved by experienced firefighting foam lawyers have not only provided much-needed compensation and accountability but have also raised awareness about the dangers of PFAS exposure in firefighting.

Their expertise in navigating the legal landscape has not only empowered affected firefighters but has also paved the way for future cases seeking justice and compensation for those impacted by PFAS chemicals.

Legal Consultation: What to Expect When Meeting with an AFFF Lawyer

When facing legal issues related to Aqueous Film-Forming Foam (AFFF) contamination and firefighting, it is important to seek professional advice from firefighters or a firefighting lawyer for a legal consultation.

This can provide you with valuable insights and guidance.

Here are some of the factors:

Extent of Harm
Medical Expenses
Lost Income
Pain and Suffering
Legal Representation;

If you are dealing with PFAS-contaminated water, here is what you can expect during your initial meeting:

  • Discussion of your situation
  • Evaluation of potential claims
  • Explanation of legal options
  • Guidance on next steps
  • Discussion of potential outcomes
  • Q&A and Clarification

Discussion of Your Situation

The lawyer will begin by asking you about your specific circumstances and the legal issues you are facing.

They will want to understand the details of your AFFF contamination case and how it relates to firefighting.

Evaluation of Potential Claims

The lawyer will assess the strength of your case and determine if you have grounds for legal action.

They will review any evidence you have and may ask for additional documentation or information.

Explanation of Legal Options

Based on the evaluation of your case, the lawyer will explain the legal options available to you.

They will discuss potential strategies and the likelihood of success for each option.

Guidance on Next Steps

The lawyer will provide guidance on what you should do next.

This may include gathering more evidence, filing a lawsuit, or pursuing alternative dispute resolution methods.

Discussion of Potential Outcomes

The lawyer will discuss the potential outcomes of your case, including the possibility of compensation for damages or other remedies.

They will also explain any potential challenges or risks involved.

Q&A and Clarification

Throughout the meeting, the lawyer will encourage you to ask questions and seek clarification on any points you do not understand.

They will ensure that you have a clear understanding of your legal situation and the steps involved in pursuing your case.

It is important to be open and honest with your lawyer, providing them with all the relevant information to help them assess your case effectively.

Overview of what happens during an initial consultation with an AFFF lawyer

In your initial consultation, the firefighting foam cancer lawyers will gather information about your AFFF firefighting foam lawsuits and evaluate its strengths.

They will inquire about your exposure to AFFF and any related health problems or property damage.

To gain a comprehensive understanding of your trial situation, the law firm attorney may inquire about water et al.

Provide the lawyer with the following information:

  • Where you were exposed to AFFF
  • How often and for how long you were exposed
  • Any medical diagnoses or symptoms you have
  • Any documentation or evidence you have
  • Any previous legal actions you have taken

This will help the lawyer assess the strength of your AFFF class action lawsuit and determine the compensation you may be entitled to for water contamination.

Importance of providing all relevant information to your attorney during the consultation

In order for the AFFF lawyer to effectively represent you in the PFAS firefighting foam lawsuit trial, it is important to provide them with all relevant information during the consultation.

This includes details about the PFAS, firefighting foam, lawsuits, and trials. Here are some: 

  • Detailed accounts of your exposure to firefighting foam (AFFF) and its consequences, including potential health risks from PFAS chemicals, are crucial for building a strong case.
  • Medical records, test results, and doctor’s diagnoses related to any health issues you have experienced due to the trial, cancer, MDL, or chemicals.
  • Photographs or videos showing property damage caused by AFFF contamination from firefighting foam and harmful PFAS chemicals are important evidence for the lawsuit.
  • Any correspondence or documentation from responsible parties or insurance companies regarding the use of AFFF firefighting foam, chemicals, and the ongoing trial involving PFAS.

By providing comprehensive details about your trial, MDL, AFFF class action, or AFFF lawsuit, you help the attorney build a strong case on your behalf.

Open communication is key to establishing trust and ensuring a successful attorney-client relationship.

Defense Strategies for AFFF Lawsuits

Defense Strategies in AFFF Lawsuits

Common defense tactics used by companies facing AFFF lawsuits.

Companies facing lawsuits related to chemicals like PFAS often employ various defense strategies to protect themselves and mitigate potential liabilities.

These strategies are designed to minimize their legal and financial consequences in AFFF lawsuits.

Some common defense tactics used by companies include, but are not limited to, these five (5) strategies:

  • Contractor defense
  • Government contractor defense
  • Challenging causation
  • Statute of limitations
  • Assumption of risk

1. Contractor Defense

Companies may argue that they were not directly responsible for the manufacturing or distribution of the AFFF toxic chemicals product in question.

Instead, they may claim that they were acting as contractors or suppliers and should not be held liable for any negative effects of the product.

2. Government Contractor Defense

This defense strategy is often used by companies that have supplied AFFF products to the government or military.

They may argue that they were following specific government specifications and regulations and, therefore, cannot be held responsible for any harm caused by the product.

3. Challenging Causation

Companies may attempt to challenge the link between the AFFF product and the alleged harm caused to individuals or the environment.

They may argue that there is insufficient scientific evidence or that other factors contributed to the harm, thereby attempting to weaken the plaintiffs’ claims.

4. Statute of Limitations

Companies may invoke the statute of limitations defense, which asserts that the lawsuit was filed after the legally prescribed time limit for filing such claims has expired.

This defense aims to dismiss the case based on the argument that it was not timely filed.

5. Assumption of Risk

Companies may argue that the plaintiffs were aware of the potential risks associated with using AFFF products but chose to use them anyway.

By asserting that the plaintiffs willingly assumed the risks, companies aim to reduce their own liability and shift some responsibility onto the plaintiffs.

It is important to note that the effectiveness of these defense strategies can vary depending on the specific circumstances of each case and the strength of the evidence presented by both parties.

How skilled attorneys counter defense strategies to protect their clients’ rights.

Skilled attorneys in AFFF lawsuits use effective strategies to protect their clients’ rights and increase their chances of success.

They gather strong evidence, establish a clear link between AFFF exposure and health issues, challenge defense tactics, and may opt for class action lawsuits to strengthen their case.

Examples of successful defense strategies employed by experienced AFFF lawyers.

Experienced AFFF lawyers or firefighting foam lawyers have effectively fought against defense tactics in PFAS lawsuit cases, using innovative approaches to seek justice for cancer victims.

In a prominent lawsuit against a chemical company accused of producing harmful AFFF products used on military bases, the plaintiffs’ attorney successfully challenged the government contractor’s defense.

They proved that the company did not meet safety standards outlined in its military contract, potentially causing health problems like PFAS-related cancer.

Affording a Firefighting Foam Attorney

Affording a Firefighting Foam Attorney

When it comes to pursuing a PFAS cancer lawsuit related to firefighting foam, affording a qualified attorney is essential for plaintiffs seeking justice.

However, the costs associated with such lawsuits can be overwhelming.

Fortunately, there are options available to help individuals overcome financial obstacles and secure the legal representation they need for their PFAS cancer case.

One option for affording a firefighting foam attorney is to seek out law firms that work on a contingency fee basis.

This means that the attorney will only receive payment if they win the case or secure a settlement on behalf of the plaintiff.

This arrangement can be particularly beneficial for individuals who may not have the financial resources to pay for legal representation upfront.

Another option is to explore pro bono legal services.

Many law firms and organizations offer pro bono representation for individuals who cannot afford an attorney.

These services are typically provided free of charge or at a significantly reduced rate.

It’s important to note that pro bono services may have specific eligibility criteria, so it’s essential to research and reach out to organizations that specialize in PFAS cancer cases.

Additionally, some attorneys may be willing to work out a payment plan or offer a reduced fee based on the individual’s financial circumstances.

It’s worth discussing these options with potential attorneys to see if they are willing to accommodate the plaintiff’s financial situation.

In some cases, legal expenses related to a PFAS cancer lawsuit may be covered by insurance.

It’s important to review insurance policies carefully and consult with an attorney to determine if coverage is available.

Lastly, there may be financial assistance programs or grants available specifically for individuals pursuing PFAS cancer lawsuits.

Researching and reaching out to organizations that support individuals affected by PFAS contamination can provide valuable information on potential financial resources.

Contingency Fee Arrangements: A Pathway to Justice

One way to afford a firefighting foam attorney in an AFFF lawsuit is through contingency fee arrangements.

These agreements allow plaintiffs to hire experienced lawyers without upfront payment.

Instead, the attorney’s fees are contingent upon winning the case or securing a settlement, even in cancer cases.

Here are some of the factors:

Extent of Harm
Medical Expenses
Lost Income
Pain and Suffering
Legal Representation; Contingency Fee Arrangements A Pathway to Justice

Benefits of contingency fee arrangements include:

  • Accessible Legal Representation
  • Motivated Advocacy
  • Reduced Financial Risk
  • Level Playing Field

Accessible Legal Representation

Contingency fees ensure that those affected by the AFFF lawsuit can pursue compensation for harm caused by AFFF firefighting foam containing PFAS.

Motivated Advocacy

Attorneys only get paid if they win the AFFF lawsuit or secure a settlement related to AFFF firefighting foam, so they are highly motivated to provide effective representation in cancer cases caused by PFAS.

Reduced Financial Risk

Plaintiffs don’t have to pay attorney fees if their case involving PFAS and AFFF firefighting foam is unsuccessful, only responsible for lawsuit expenses.

Level Playing Field

Contingency fees level the playing field for individuals affected by the AFFF lawsuit and PFAS exposure, allowing them to stand up against powerful entities responsible for their suffering due to AFFF firefighting foam and increased cancer risk.

Financial Assistance Resources

Besides contingency fee arrangements, there are resources and organizations that offer financial assistance specifically for covering legal fees in firefighting foam cases, like AFFF lawsuits involving PFAS and cancer.

These resources provide valuable support and help ease the financial burdens of seeking justice in these cases.

Some options for financial assistance include legal aid organizations, legal expense insurance, and litigation funding.

By considering these options, plaintiffs can afford experienced lawyers for their AFFF lawsuit and pursue their cases without financial strain.

Scientific Testing on AFFF and PFAS Toxicity

Scientific Testing on AFFF and PFAS Toxicity

Scientific studies have extensively examined the toxicity of polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) chemicals found in firefighting foams like aqueous film-forming foams (AFFFs).

These studies have a specific goal of understanding the potential health risks associated with PFAS exposure, particularly the risk of developing cancer.

Additionally, these studies aim to shed light on the long-term effects of PFAS exposure, which may lead to legal actions and lawsuits.

Laboratory tests have yielded concerning results regarding the dangers of PFAS chemicals, including AFFF firefighting foam.

Exposure to certain PFAS, such as AFFF, has been linked to various health issues, including reproductive problems, liver damage, immune system dysfunction, and an increased risk of cancer.

The scientific evidence gathered from these tests underscores the urgent need for action to address PFAS contamination and the ongoing lawsuits related to AFFF.

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has played a crucial role in overseeing test trials and research efforts related to firefighting foam (AFFF) and PFAS exposure.

Their findings have highlighted the severity of water contamination caused by these toxic chemicals, which has resulted in an increase in lawsuit cases.

Municipal water contamination cases across the country further emphasize the pressing need for comprehensive regulation and remediation measures to address the cancer risks associated with AFFF and PFAS.

More to Consider

PFAS, like AFFF firefighting foam, are called “forever chemicals” because they don’t break down easily and can accumulate in the environment and human bodies.

Even small amounts of exposure to AFFF firefighting foam can have long-lasting adverse effects, such as cancer.

Ongoing research aims to understand how these chemicals cause harm, including cancer, at a molecular level.

This knowledge can help develop strategies to protect public health and address potential lawsuits.

Collaboration between scientists, policymakers, organizations, and affected communities is crucial in addressing the urgent issue of PFAS contamination caused by AFFF firefighting foam.

Some individuals may consider filing an AFFF lawsuit due to the health risks associated with PFAS exposure, including cancer.

Latest Updates on AFFF Class Action Lawsuits

Latest Updates on AFFF Class Action Lawsuits

Recent Developments in AFFF Contamination Lawsuits

In the ongoing AFFF class action lawsuits regarding Aqueous Film-Forming Foam (AFFF) contamination, there have been important updates on PFAS and cancer.

Plaintiffs in different areas are seeking justice for the harm caused by this firefighting foam, and recent developments show progress in addressing the concerns.

A significant development is the increase in new cases related to firefighting foam.

In the past month, there has been a surge in filings as more affected individuals come forward.

These lawsuits join the growing number of class actions seeking compensation for health issues, including cancer, and property damage from exposure to AFFF and PFAS.

Notable Settlements and Verdicts in AFFF Cases

Recent progress in firefighting foam class action lawsuits has resulted in notable settlements and verdicts.

Defendants involved in the manufacturing or distribution of AFFF products containing PFAS, which are linked to cancer, have faced legal consequences in various jurisdictions.

For example, a major settlement was reached last week with a leading manufacturer of AFFF foam in a firefighting lawsuit.

This settlement exceeded expectations and provided substantial compensation to affected individuals and communities.

It not only offers financial relief but also sends a powerful message that companies responsible for producing harmful substances like PFAS will be held accountable for the increased cancer risk.

Additionally, recent jury verdicts in favor of plaintiffs in AFFF lawsuits have demonstrated the strength of these cases.

Jurors recognize the impact of AFFF and PFAS exposure on people’s lives, potentially leading to cancer, and have awarded significant damages.

These verdicts serve as a deterrent to other defendants who may disregard public safety when dealing with hazardous substances like AFFF.

Legislative Actions and Regulatory Measures Addressing AFFF Issues

Legislative actions are being taken to address concerns about firefighting foam contamination and its potential link to cancer-causing PFAS chemicals.

Some states are introducing bills to ban or restrict the use of these hazardous foams, while regulatory agencies are revisiting safety standards.

Multidistrict litigation has also been established to streamline lawsuits and ensure consistent rulings.

These developments are helping to hold responsible parties accountable and seek compensation for those affected by contamination.

Recovering Compensation in AFFF Lawsuit Settlements

Recovering Compensation in AFFF Lawsuit Settlements

Types of compensation available for individuals affected by AFFF contamination

If you have been adversely impacted by Aqueous Film-Forming Foam (AFFF) contamination, such as firefighting professionals who are at a higher risk of exposure to PFAS, you may be eligible to seek financial compensation through an AFFF lawsuit settlement.

These settlements aim to provide relief and support to those who have suffered due to exposure to the harmful substance, which has been linked to serious health issues, including cancer.

Here are some of the factors:

Extent of Harm
Medical Expenses
Lost Income
Pain and Suffering
Legal Representation; Contingency Fee Arrangements A Pathway to Justice; Types of compensation available for individuals affected by AFFF contamination

Various types of compensation are typically available for individuals affected by AFFF contamination and its potential health consequences.

  1. Medical Expenses: Compensation may cover the costs associated with medical treatment, including hospital bills, doctor visits, medications, and ongoing therapies required as a result of exposure to AFFF.
  2. Lost Wages: If your health condition caused by AFFF contamination has resulted in missed workdays or reduced earning capacity, you may be entitled to compensation for lost wages and future income loss.
  3. Pain and Suffering: Compensation can also account for the physical pain, emotional distress, and diminished quality of life experienced as a result of the harm caused by AFFF exposure.
  4. Property Damage: In cases where the property has been damaged or destroyed due to AFFF contamination, individuals may seek reimbursement for repair or replacement costs.
  5. Wrongful Death: In tragic cases where a loved one has passed away due to complications related to AFFF exposure, surviving family members may pursue compensation through a wrongful death claim.

Factors considered when determining the amount of compensation in an AFFF lawsuit settlement.

When negotiating a firefighting foam (AFFF) lawsuit settlement involving PFAS contamination, several factors come into play when determining the amount of compensation that should be awarded for cancer cases.

Here are some of the factors:

Extent of Harm
Medical Expenses
Lost Income
Pain and Suffering
Legal Representation; Contingency Fee Arrangements A Pathway to Justice; Types of compensation available for individuals affected by AFFF contamination; Factors considered when determining the amount of compensation in an AFFF lawsuit settlement.

Here are some of the factors:

  • Extent of Harm
  • Medical Expenses
  • Lost Income
  • Pain and Suffering
  • Legal Representation

Extent of Harm

The severity of health issues suffered by the individual is a significant factor in calculating compensation amounts.

This includes considering both immediate effects and long-term consequences resulting from exposure to AFFF chemicals.

Medical Expenses

The total cost incurred for medical treatments directly related to AFFF contamination is taken into account.

This includes past, present, and future medical expenses.

Lost Income

Compensation may be awarded for the income lost due to missed workdays or reduced earning capacity caused by health issues resulting from AFFF exposure.

Pain and Suffering

The physical and emotional distress endured by the affected individual is evaluated when determining compensation.

This includes considering the impact on overall quality of life.

Legal Representation

Experienced AFFF lawyers play a crucial role in negotiating settlements on behalf of their clients.

Their expertise and ability to present a strong case can significantly influence the amount of compensation secured.

How experienced AFFF lawyers negotiate with defendants to secure fair compensation for their clients.

Experienced AFFF lawyers are skilled negotiators who secure fair compensation for their clients in lawsuit settlements.

They assess each client’s circumstances, including harm suffered, medical records, and financial losses, to strengthen their case.

They also prepare a comprehensive demand package outlining their client’s losses, such as medical expenses, lost wages, and property damage, caused by AFFF contamination.

Conclusion: AFFF and Cancer Connection

Conclusion AFFF and Cancer Connection

If you or a loved one has been affected by AFFF exposure, it’s important to get help from an experienced AFFF lawyer.

These lawyers specialize in handling cases related to AFFF and can guide you through the legal process.

They will assess your case, explain your rights, discuss compensation options, and outline the steps involved in pursuing a lawsuit.

AFFF lawsuits require different defense strategies for each case.

Experienced lawyers use tactics like gathering evidence, conducting scientific tests, consulting experts, and staying updated on class action lawsuits related to AFFF to build a strong case against those responsible for your suffering.

Affording an AFFF lawyer shouldn’t be a barrier to seeking justice.

Many lawyers work on a contingency fee basis, meaning they only get paid if they win your case and secure compensation for you.

This ensures that anyone can have access to quality legal representation, regardless of their financial situation.

Scientific testing continues to reveal the toxicity of AFFF and its main component, PFAS.

These studies help establish the link between AFFF exposure and adverse health effects like cancer.

Staying informed about these findings can strengthen your case with compelling evidence.

Lastly, staying updated on AFFF class action lawsuits can provide valuable insights into successful compensation strategies.

By staying informed, you can make informed decisions and take appropriate action to protect your rights..

AFFF Lawsuit Frequently Asked Questions

Published By:
Picture of Jessica Paluch-Hoerman
Jessica Paluch-Hoerman

Managing Attorney & Owner

With over 25 years of legal experience, Jessica Paluch-Hoerman is an Illinois lawyer, a CPA, and a mother of three.  She spent the first decade of her career working as an international tax attorney at Deloitte.

In 2009, Jessie co-founded her own law firm with her husband – which has scaled to over 30 employees since its conception.

In 2016, Jessie founded TruLaw, which allows her to collaborate with attorneys and legal experts across the United States on a daily basis. This hypervaluable network of experts is what enables her to share the most reliable, accurate, and up-to-date legal information with our readers!

Additional AFFF Lawsuit resources on our website:
All
FAQs
Injuries & Conditions
Legal Help
Military
Other Resources
Settlements & Compensation
You can learn more about this topic by visiting any of our AFFF Lawsuit pages listed below:
AFFF Bladder Cancer Lawsuit
AFFF Breast Cancer Lawsuit
AFFF Class Action Lawsuits: Strength in Numbers for Plaintiffs
AFFF Colorectal Cancer Lawsuit
AFFF Endometrial Cancer Lawsuit
AFFF Exposure Side Effects and Long-term Health Risks
AFFF Exposure Symptoms for Navy Service Members
AFFF Exposure Symptoms: Firefighting Foam Linked to Cancer
AFFF Exposure VA Disability: How the Claims Process Works
AFFF Firefighting Foam Lawsuit and Firefighters' Health Issues
AFFF Firefighting Foam Lawsuit: Health Conditions & Risks
AFFF Firefighting Foam Lawsuit: What You Need to Know?
AFFF Foam Cancer Lawsuit: Legal Implications
AFFF Foam Cancer Types, Risks, and Other Side Effects
AFFF Kidney Cancer Lawsuit
AFFF Lawsuit | AFFF Firefighting Foam Lawsuit
AFFF Lawsuit Advice for Veterans: Legal Considerations
AFFF Lawsuit Military: Legal Assistance for Veterans
AFFF Lawsuit Navy Boot Camp
AFFF Lawsuit Settlement Amounts & Payouts
AFFF Lawsuit Settlement Amounts DuPont: Legal Overview
AFFF Lawsuit South Carolina: Legal Proceedings
AFFF Lawsuit To Enhance Safety Of Firefighting Practices
AFFF Lawsuit: Shaping Firefighter Safety Standards
AFFF Lawsuit: Significance of Empowering Firefighters
AFFF Lawsuits Guide: Unraveling the Legal Process Step-by-Step
AFFF Lawsuits: Can You Get VA Compensation for AFFF Exposure?
AFFF Lawsuits: Impact on Service Members at Military Bases
AFFF Lawyer: Hiring Process Factors You Should Know
AFFF Leukemia Lawsuit
AFFF Liver Cancer Lawsuit
AFFF Lymphoma Lawsuit
AFFF Mesothelioma Lawsuit
AFFF Multiple Myeloma Lawsuit
AFFF Neuroendocrine Tumors Lawsuit: Analyzing Studies
AFFF Non-Hodgkin Lymphoma Lawsuit
AFFF Ovarian Cancer Lawsuit
AFFF Pancreatic Cancer Lawsuit
AFFF Prostate Cancer Lawsuit
AFFF Settlement: Firefighting Foam Cancer
AFFF Testicular Cancer Lawsuit
AFFF Thyroid Cancer Lawsuit
AFFF Thyroid Disease Lawsuit
AFFF Ulcerative Colitis Lawsuit
Air Force Firefighting Foam Lawsuit
Best Law Firm for an AFFF Lawsuit Claim
FAQ: Do You Need an AFFF Lawyer for Contamination Cases?
FAQ: Does AFFF Cause Cancer?
FAQ: Has the AFFF Lawsuit Been Settled?
FAQ: How Much is the AFFF Lawsuit Going to Payout?
FAQ: Is AFFF Firefighting Foam Toxic?
FAQ: Is There An AFFF Class Action Lawsuit?
FAQ: What Firefighting Foam Has PFAS Chemicals?
FAQ: What Happens If You Are Exposed to AFFF?
FAQ: What Health Effects Are Caused by AFFF Foam Chemicals?
FAQ: When Will AFFF Lawsuits Be Settled?
FAQ: Who is Eligible for the AFFF Cancer Lawsuit?
FAQ: Will There Be an AFFF Foam Settlement in 2024?
Fire Fighting Foam Health Effects
Firefighting Foam & PFAS: The Hidden Dangers
Firefighting Foam Cancer Lawsuit
Firefighting Foam Cancer Lawsuit: AFFF Exposure Risk
Firefighting Foam Cancer: What is it?
Firefighting Foam Lawsuit Consultations: What to Expect?
Firefighting Foam: Understanding Health Effects on Firefighters
How Do AFFF Lawsuit Tiers Work in the Firefighting Foam Lawsuit?
How to File an AFFF Firefighting Foam Lawsuit
Navy AFFF Exposure Claims Process: Firefighter Foam Lawsuit
Tips for Choosing the Right AFFF Lawyer for Your Case
VA Claims for Exposure to AFFF: Steps to File a Claim
What Firefighters Should Know About the AFFF Lawsuit
What is the Average Payout for the AFFF Lawsuit
Which AFFF Manufacturers Are Named In The AFFF Lawsuits?
Who Qualifies for AFFF Compensation in the AFFF Lawsuits?
AFFF Lawsuit

AFFF Lawsuit claims are being filed against manufacturers of aqueous film-forming foam (AFFF), commonly used in firefighting.

Claims allege that companies such as 3M, DuPont, and Tyco Fire Products failed to adequately warn users about the potential dangers of AFFF exposure — including increased risks of various cancers and diseases.

Depo Provera Lawsuit

Depo Provera Lawsuit claims are being filed by individuals who allege they developed meningioma (a type of brain tumor) after receiving Depo-Provera birth control injections.

A 2024 study found that women using Depo-Provera for at least 1 year are five times more likely to develop meningioma brain tumors compared to those not using the drug.

Suboxone Lawsuit

Suboxone Tooth Decay Lawsuit claims are being filed against Indivior, the manufacturer of Suboxone, a medication used to treat opioid addiction.

Claims allege that Indivior failed to adequately warn users about the potential dangers of severe tooth decay and dental injuries associated with Suboxone’s sublingual film version.

Social Media Lawsuits

Social Media Harm Lawsuits are being filed against social media companies for allegedly causing mental health issues in children and teens.

Claims allege that companies like Meta, Google, ByteDance, and Snap designed addictive platforms that led to anxiety, depression, and other mental health issues without adequately warning users or parents.

Vaginal Mesh Lawsuits

Transvaginal Mesh Lawsuits are being filed against manufacturers of transvaginal mesh products used to treat pelvic organ prolapse (POP) and stress urinary incontinence (SUI).

Claims allege that companies like Ethicon, C.R. Bard, and Boston Scientific failed to adequately warn about potential dangers — including erosion, pain, and infection.

Bair Hugger Lawsuit

Bair Hugger Warming Blanket Lawsuits involve claims against 3M — alleging their surgical warming blankets caused severe infections and complications (particularly in hip and knee replacement surgeries).

Plaintiffs claim 3M failed to warn about potential risks — despite knowing about increased risk of deep joint infections since 2011.

Baby Formula NEC Lawsuit

Baby Formula NEC Lawsuit claims are being filed against manufacturers of cow’s milk-based baby formula products.

Claims allege that companies like Abbott Laboratories (Similac) and Mead Johnson & Company (Enfamil) failed to warn about the increased risk of necrotizing enterocolitis (NEC) in premature infants.

Do You
Have A Case?

Here, at TruLaw, we’re committed to helping victims get the justice they deserve.

Alongside our partner law firms, we have successfully collected over $3 Billion in verdicts and settlements on behalf of injured individuals.

Would you like our help?

Other AFFF Lawsuit Resources

All
FAQs
Injuries & Conditions
Legal Help
Military
Other Resources
Settlements & Compensation