More than 3,500 personal injury and wrongful death cases are currently pending US District Court for the Southern District of Ohio in MDL 2433 about the cancer-causing chemical C-8 that discharged from DuPont’s Washington Works Plant into the water supply in West Virginia.
The US Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation created the Multidistrict Litigation docket on April 9, 2013. Judge Edmund A. Sargus, Jr., Chief US District Judge is supervising the docket, IN RE: E. I. du Pont de Nemours and Company C-8 Personal Injury Litigation.
Probable link to cancer
Over many years du Pont discharged the chemical C-8 used to make Teflon (also known as perfluorooctoanoic acid (PFOA) or ammonium perfluorooctanoate (APFO) into the Ohio River water supply. The plaintiffs allege that they suffer or suffered from one or more of six diseases — including kidney tumors and testicular cancer.
A “Probable Link” to C-8 exposure finding was made after a study conducted as part of a 2005 settlement between DuPont and a class of about 80,000 persons who consumed water from six water districts allegedly contaminated by C-8 from the Washington Works Plant. See Leach v. E.I. Du Pont de Nemours & Co., No. 01-C-608 (W. Va. Cir. Ct.).
Two cases are set for trial soon:
- November 14, 2016, Jury Trial of Kenneth Vigneron Sr. v. E. I. du Pont de Nemours and Company, Case No. 2:13-cv-136.
- January 17, 2017, Jury Trial of Larry Ogle Moodyr. v. E. I. du Pont de Nemours and Company, Case No. 2:15-cv-803.
In earlier trials, juries have ruled against du Pont:
On July 6, 2016 jurors ruled that DuPont acted with malice by dumping chemical-tainted water from its West Virginia plant into the Ohio River, causing Marietta College professor David Freeman to get cancer and awarded him $5.1 million in compensatory damages.
In October 2015, a different jury returned a $1.6 million verdict in favor of a woman who also said she got cancer because of drinking water contaminated with C8. Carla Bartlett of Guysville, Ohio, was awarded $1.1 million in damages for DuPont’s negligence and $500,000 for emotional distress, but did not receive any punitive damages. That verdict is being appealed.