We have helped to secure more than $80 billion in jury verdicts and settlements since 1955.
The lawsuit against DuPont involving the chemical C8 states the company released millions of pounds of the chemical into the Ohio River and into the air from its plant in Parkersburg, West Virginia, causing thousands of persons to suffer injuries, including kidney and testicular cancer.
More than 30 years ago DuPont became aware that C8 was in drinking water in Ohio and West Virginia at dangerous levels, yet said nothing to the government or public. In fact, DuPont increased its production, and continued to discharge C8 in a manner to enter the Ohio River and air.
We are no longer accepting these cases.
The six water districts in West Virginia and Ohio that became contaminated by C8 include: Little Hocking Water Association, City of Belpre, Tuppers Plains – Chester Water District, and Village of Pomeroy in Ohio; Lubeck Public Service District and Mason County Public Service District in West Virginia; in addition to numerous private water wells located within the geographic boundaries of the six water districts.</.p>
C8 (also known as Perfluorooctanoic (PFOA)) is a man-made chemical used in the manufacturing of Teflon, fast food wrappers, waterpoof clothing, pizza boxes, microwave popcorn bags, carpet, dental floss, cosmetics, and hundreds of other products. DuPont began using the chemical in 1951 as a means to smooth out the lumps in Teflon, even though its chief toxicologist at the time warned that C8 was toxic.
As part of a class action settlement against DuPont, an independent group of public health scientists were chosen to assess whether or not there is a probable link between C8 exposure and various diseases. The science panel consisted of Dr. Tony Fletcher of the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine; Dr. David Savitz of Brown University in Providence; and Dr. Kyle Steenland of Emory University in Atlanta.
After conducting eight years of exposure and health studies, the science panel reached the following conclusions:
C8 has been so widely used in America for so long that it can be found in the blood of more than 99% of all Americans, newborn human babies, breast milk, and umbilical cord blood according to the Centers for Disease Control. C8 is expected to remain in the environment for thousands of years.
A medical monitoring program has been established for individuals potentially injured by C8. The program allows you to get a free C8 blood test and free doctor’s visit to determine whether you have suffered any diseases that could be caused by C8 exposure. To determine whether you are qualified for medical testing, click C8 Medical Monitoring Program
Our law firm has been in existence for more than 60 years, and is considered a national leader in this type of litigation. We have received well over 150 jury verdicts throughout the country in the amount of $1 million or more, and achieved verdicts and settlements in excess of $3 billion. On October 7, 2015, we became the first law firm in the country to get a jury verdict against DuPont for knowingly contaminating drinking water with C8, and causing kidney cancer to a woman exposed to the chemical. For more information, please visit our About Us section.
Our lawyers provide absolutely free confidential consultations, and if we are fortunate enough for you to hire us, we never will charge you any fees or costs unless you first recover. To review a summary of our fees and costs, click Fees & Costs.
To contact us for a free confidential consult, you can call us at (800) 277-1193 (toll free). You also can request a confidential consultation by clicking Free & Confidential Consult, which form will be immediately reviewed by one of our attorneys handling the C8 litigation.
As of this time, there have been no large group settlements providing monetary damages involving the DuPont C8 injuries. However, the trials against DuPont have just begun, and because of the successful jury verdicts and various court rulings against DuPont, we do believe settlements should begin in the near future. This in no way means you can wait to hire an attorney and file a lawsuit. Just the opposite, if you wait, you could permanently lose all of your rights, even if a settlement occurs in the future. This is because every state has time limitations in which you can file a lawsuit for any injuries that you have sustained or could sustain resulting from C8.
As part of the national litigation involving C8, the following facts and statements were discovered in DuPont internal documents. You can only imagine what has not been turned over and was destroyed.
DuPont Secret Documents & Knowledge
Probable Link Evaluation of Cancer: there is a probable link between exposure to C8 and testicular cancer and kidney cancer. To read more, click C8 Science Panel
Probable Link Evaluation of High Cholesterol: there is a probable link between exposure to C8 and diagnosed high cholesterol (hypercholesterolemia). To read more, click C8 Science Panel
Probable Link Evaluation of Pregnancy Induced Hypertension and Preeclampsia: there is a probable link between exposure to C8 and pregnancy-induced hypertension. To read more, click C8 Science Panel
Probable Link Evaluation of Thyroid disease: there is a probable link between exposure to C8 and thyroid disease. To read more, click C8 Science Panel
Probable Link Evaluation of Ulcerative Colitis: there is a probable link between exposure to C8 and ulcerative colitis. To read more, click C8 Science Panel
Link Evaluation of Autoimmune Disease: not a probable link between C8 and rheumatoid arthritis, lupus, type1 diabetes, Crohn’s disease, or multiple sclerosis. To read more, click C8 Science Panel
Link Evaluation of Birth Defects: not a probable link between exposure to C8 and birth defects. To read more, click C8 Science Panel
Link Evaluation of Diabetes: not a probable link between exposure to C8 and Type II (adult-onset) diabetes. To read more, click C8 Science Panel
Link Evaluation of Heart Disease: not a probable link between exposure to C8 and diagnosed high blood pressure (hypertension) or coronary artery disease, including its manifestations as myocardial infarction, angina, and coronary bypass surgery. To read more, click C8 Science Panel
Link Evaluation of Infectious Disease: not a probable link between exposure to C8 and common infections, including influenza, in children or adults. To read more, click C8 Science Panel
Link Evaluation for Chronic Kidney Disease: not a probable link between exposure to C8 and chronic kidney disease. To read more, click C8 Science Panel
Link Evaluation for Liver Diseases: not a probable link between exposure to C8 and Liver disease. To read more, click C8 Science Panel
Link Evaluation of Miscarriage and Stillbirths: not a probable link between exposure to C8 and miscarriage or stillbirth. To read more, click C8 Science Panel
Link Evaluation of Neurodevelopmental Disorders in Children: not probable link between exposure to C8 and neurodevelopmental disorders in children, including attention deficit disorders and learning disabilities. To read more, click C8 Science Panel
Link Evaluation for Non-infectious Lung Disease (Asthma and Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease – COPD): not a probable link between exposure to C8 and asthma or chronic obstructive airways disease (COPD). To read more, click C8 Science Panel
Link Evaluation for Osteoarthritis: not a probable link between exposure to C8 and osteoarthritis. To read more, click C8 Science Panel
Link Evaluation for Parkinson’s Disease: not a probable link between exposure to C8 and Parkinson’s disease. To read more, click C8 Science Panel
Link Evaluation of Preterm Birth and Low Birthweight: not a probable link between exposure to C8 and preterm birth or low birthweight. To read more, click C8 Science Panel
Link Evaluation of Stroke: not a probable link between exposure to C8 and stroke. To read more, click C8 Science Panel
As of this time, there has not been a recall of C8. However, an independent science panel consisting of three epidemiologists determined that C8 can cause high cholesterol, kidney cancer, pregnancy-induced hypertension, testicular cancer, thyroid disease, and ulcerative colitis.
“For Decades to Come”: Dupont’s C8 Catastrophe Will Persist for Generations
On October 7, 2015, a Columbus, Ohio, federal jury returned a $1.6 million verdict against chemical giant DuPont for plaintiff Carla Bartlett. In that verdict, the jury determined that water pollution of a certain toxin from DuPont’s Washington Works Plant in Parkersburg, West Virginia, caused Bartlett to develop kidney cancer. That toxin is known as “C8”: a surfactant which, until 2014, was used by DuPont in its Teflon® manufacturing process. To read more, click The Ring of Fire Network
Teflon’s Toxic Legacy
Proving that DuPont was legally culpable for Bartlett’s kidney cancer required years of extraordinarily innovative lawyering – and at times some plain dumb luck. The very improbability of that verdict demonstrates much that is flawed about the way this country regulates potentially dangerous chemicals. With no mandatory safety testing for the vast majority of the tens of thousands of chemicals used daily in America, doctors and public health officials have little information to guide them as they seek to identify potential health hazards – including the chemical, called C8, that DuPont knowingly allowed to pollute Bartlett’s drinking water. To read more, click Earth Island Journal
People Are Still Exposed To the Teflon Chemical At Unsafe Levels, Group Says
It’s been more than a decade since investigations revealed that Teflon contained a consumer chemical called PFOA that was linked to birth defects, heart disease and other health issues, but the safety of the chemical is far from settled. PFOA is dangerous at concentrations far lower than previously recognized, according to a recent investigation. To read more, click Time Magazine
THE TEFLON TOXIN: How DuPont Slipped Past the EPA
During the five decades in which DuPont used and profited from C8, the company had only infrequently discussed the chemical with environmental authorities, and it kept most of its extensive internal research on the chemical confidential. After Bilott sent out his packages of evidence, however, DuPont’s relationships to government agencies shifted dramatically. Bilott’s revelations had the power to tarnish the company’s reputation and lead to huge legal and cleanup costs, so DuPont focused on weathering the scrutiny of regulators and keeping its name — and profits — unscathed. To read more, click The Intercept
Welcome to Beautiful Parkersburg, West Virginia: Home to one of the most brazen, deadly corporate gambits in U.S. history.
In August 2000, Bilott came across a single paper that mentioned the presence of a little-known substance called perfluorooctanoic acid in Dry Run Creek. Bilott requested more information on the chemical, which is often called C8 and is found in thousands of household products, including carpeting, Teflon pans, waterproof clothes, dental floss, kitty litter and cosmetics. Unbeknownst to Bilott, his inquiry triggered a panic inside DuPont’s Delaware headquarters. “The [expletive] is about to hit the fan in WV,” the company’s in-house counsel, Bernard J. Reilly, wrote in an email to his colleagues. “The lawyer for the farmer finally realizes the surfactant [C8] issue . . .[expletive] him” To read more, click The Huffington Post
THE TEFLON TOXIN: DuPont and the Chemistry of Deception
Several blockbuster discoveries, including nylon, Lycra, and Tyvek, helped transform the E. I. du Pont de Nemours company from a 19th-century gunpowder mill into “one of the most successful and sustained industrial enterprises in the world,” as its corporate website puts it. Indeed, in 2014, the company reaped more than $95 million in sales each day. Perhaps no product is as responsible for its dominance as Teflon, which was introduced in 1946, and for more than 60 years C8 was an essential ingredient of Teflon. To read more, click The Intercept
Levin Law