“Seldom is so ambitious a case filed on so slight a basis,” wrote Circuit Judge Raymond Kethledge, noting there are thousands of companies that have manufactured PFAS but just 10 listed as defendants in the case.
How on earth did that happen? It’s such a disappointment, but at the same time I understand the judicial system has to follow the law and apply it equally.
Why was the lawsuit so limited in the first place?
Controlled opposition. Force a weak claim on a legitimate issue through the court. When the court rejects it on procedural grounds, now there is precedent.
Source: my ass
I think the precedent is only set when a case is won. At least that was my impression as a non-USer.
I could be mistaken, and I look forward to being corrected by someone who knows for sure.
🤖 I’m a bot that provides automatic summaries for articles:
Click here to see the summary
du Pont de Nemours and Co and other manufacturers of toxic so-called “forever chemicals” a big win in their fight against legal liability for the substances, rejecting a lower court’s ruling that would have allowed about 11.8 million Ohio residents to sue the companies as a group.
Circuit Court of Appeals vacated a lower court’s approval of the massive class action, which included virtually every resident of Ohio and put considerable legal pressure on the chemical manufacturers to settle the plaintiffs’ claims.
The chemicals are used in a wide range of consumer products including non-stick pans and clothing and have been tied to cancer and other diseases.
The lawsuit also sought to establish a fund to monitor Ohio residents for health impacts from PFAS exposure.
Robert Bilott, an attorney for Hardwick, said the court’s decision runs “counter to what we know about the history of manufacturing of PFAS in the United States” and said they are evaluating whether to appeal.
3M agreed in June to pay $10.3 billion to settle hundreds of claims the company polluted public drinking water with the chemicals, while Chemours Co (CC.N), DuPont de Nemours Inc (DD.N) and Corteva reached a similar deal with U.S. water providers for $1.19 billion.
Saved 55% of original text.
