A new class-action lawsuit alleges millions of homes and businesses contain carpets infused with so-called “forever chemicals,” a fact that major manufacturers have attempted to cover up for decades, despite alleged awareness of their harms to human health, according to attorneys at Hagens Berman.
The lawsuit was filed today in the U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota and, based on findings in cited studies, accuses defendants 3M, Chemours Company and EIDP Inc. (referred to as Old DuPont in the lawsuit) of allegedly engaging in a massive coverup deliberately designed to mislead the public about the alleged harms of the chemicals, per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), which have been used widely in carpets and rugs. A large percentage of PFAS produced worldwide is used to treat carpets, rugs and other home textiles to impart stain-, soil-, oil- or water-resistance.
These products constitute nearly half of all floor coverings in U.S. houses and workplaces. Because children are especially sensitive to the alleged harms of PFAS, daycares are businesses of exceptional concern. Through normal use, treated carpets, rugs and other consumer products release PFAS into indoor air and dust, which people inhale or ingest.
“Consumers in millions of homes across the country would be shocked to learn that under their feet are carpets infused with PFAS, otherwise known as forever chemicals, for their allegedly persistent and widespread harms to human health, especially children,” said Steve Berman, managing partner of Hagens Berman.
“This isn’t the first rodeo for these companies,” Berman added. “Many have already been forced to pay monumental amounts related to PFAS contamination, meaning they’ve been on notice in more ways than one, yet have allegedly continued to sweep these chemicals under the rug of unsuspecting home and businessowners.”
3M agreed to pay $10.3 billion to settle claims that it contaminated public water systems with PFAS, while Old DuPont and related companies Chemours and Corteva Inc., agreed to pay $1.19 billion to settle similar claims, among other settlements cited in the newly filed lawsuit.
Decades of Alleged Coverup
The lawsuit illustrates the history of the use of PFAS in various products manufactured by defendants, which attorneys say constitutes racketeering, bringing claims under the federal Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) Act.
The alleged coverup includes DuPont’s Teflon non-stick products, which it began making for industrial use in 1951. Only three years later, employees reported internally that PFOA (perfluorooctanoic acid, a type of PFAS) might be toxic, according to the lawsuit. Allegedly, despite this knowledge, DuPont continued to promote its products containing PFOA and other PFAS, and Teflon-coated products hit the consumer marketplace in 1961.
“Between 1951 and 2000, 3M produced at least a hundred million pounds of PFOS [perfluorooctane sulfonate, and type of PFAS] and chemicals that degrade into PFOS. This is roughly the weight of the Titanic,” the lawsuit states.
In 2000, John R. Bowman, an in-house counsel for PFOA issues, wrote an email to several colleagues, “We are going to spend millions to defend these lawsuits and have the additional threat of punitive damages hanging over our head. Getting out in front and acting responsibly can undercut and reduce the potential for punitives. …Our story is not a good one.” Another in-house attorney described Old DuPont’s response to the issue as “a debacle at best,” the complaint details.
In 2004, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) filed an administrative enforcement action against Old DuPont for its failure to disclose toxicity and exposure information for PFOA. EPA called the settlement the “largest civil administrative penalty EPA has ever obtained under any federal environmental statute.” At about the time this penalty was issued, Old DuPont was making approximately $1 billion a year in revenue from products containing PFOA.
Amid rising scrutiny of PFAS- and PFOA-containing products, 3M’s strategy included funding outside research through “grant money” including millions of dollars to a professor, John Giesy, who publicly presented himself as an independent expert but behind the scenes worked for 3M by reviewing articles submitted to academic journals for publishing. Dr. Giesy’s goal, as expressed in a 2008 email, was to “keep ‘bad’ papers [regarding PFAS] out of the literature” because “in litigation situations they can be a large obstacle to refute,” as cited in the lawsuit.
Consumers’ Rights
PFAS’ strong carbon-fluorine bonds make them extremely resistant to degradation in the environment and difficult for the body to effectively metabolize or excrete. Forever chemicals are biomagnified, remaining and building over time as exposure continues. Exposure to PFAS can lead to adverse health outcomes in humans including reproductive and developmental, liver and kidney and immunological effects.
In addition to RICO claims, the lawsuit brings a whopping 125 further claims against defendants, many of which invoke state consumer-rights laws seeking to protect everyday buyers from various forms of corporate fraud. Attorneys also bring claims of nuisance, failure to warn and design defects.
Hagens Berman seeks to recover compensation on behalf of purchasers of affected carpets, which may also include punitive damages under various laws. Find out more about consumers’ class-action lawsuit against 3M and DuPont regarding PFAS in carpets.
Hagens Berman is a global plaintiffs’ rights complex litigation law firm with a tenacious drive for achieving real results for those harmed by corporate negligence and fraud. Since its founding in 1993, the firm’s determination has earned it numerous national accolades, awards and titles of “Most Feared Plaintiff’s Firm,” MVPs and Trailblazers of class-action law. More about the law firm and its successes can be found at www.hbsslaw.com. Follow the firm for updates and news at @ClassActionLaw.
View source version on businesswire.com: https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20240830942052/en/
