In recent years, Aqueous Film-Forming Foam (AFFF) has garnered significant attention due to its association with environmental contamination and health risks. Also commonly referred to simply as firefighting foam, AFFF contains per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), known as “forever chemicals,” which have been linked to various health issues and environmental pollution.
Due to safety and health concerns related to AFFF foam, many lawsuits have been filed. Lawyers handling mass tort cases likely have seen an influx of inquiries related to the AFFF foam. With new updates and developments, law firms may continue to receive inquiries from clients who have been affected by the foam.
At Legal Conversion Center, our mass tort intake specialists can help law firms convert more AFFF cancer leads. Below, we provide an update on the status of AFFF firefighting foam lawsuits, examining recent developments, litigation trends, and the implications for affected individuals and communities.
Background on AFFF Lawsuits
AFFF has been widely used by military, industrial, and firefighting organizations for decades due to its effectiveness in extinguishing fuel-based fires. However, concerns have risen over the environmental and health consequences of PFAS contamination associated with AFFF. PFAS are persistent in the environment and have been detected in water sources, soil, and wildlife near sites where AFFF was used or stored.
Health studies have shown that exposure to PFAS may increase the risk of various adverse health effects, including cancer, immune system disorders, and developmental issues. As a result, individuals and communities impacted by PFAS contamination from AFFF have sought legal recourse through lawsuits against manufacturers, distributors, and users of AFFF products.
Recent Developments
Since the first lawsuits were filed, a great deal of focus has been placed on the safety and oversight of products like AFFF, which may contain PFAS. Some of the recent developments specifically related to the AFFF foam include:
- Consolidation of Lawsuits: Many AFFF lawsuits have been consolidated into multidistrict litigation (MDL) proceedings to streamline pretrial processes and facilitate efficient resolution. In 2021, the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation (JPML) centralized numerous AFFF lawsuits into MDL No. 2873, which is pending in the U.S. District Court for the District of South Carolina. This consolidation allows for coordinated discovery and pretrial proceedings across multiple cases.
- Settlement Agreements: Several manufacturers of AFFF firefighting foam have entered into settlement agreements to resolve lawsuits alleging liability for PFAS contamination. These settlements involve compensation for impacted communities, cleanup efforts, and commitments to develop alternative firefighting foams without PFAS. However, the terms and scope of these settlements vary, and not all affected parties may be satisfied with the outcomes.
- Legislative Actions: In response to growing concerns about PFAS contamination, federal and state governments have taken legislative actions to address the issue. The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020 included provisions to phase out the use of AFFF containing PFAS in the Department of Defense and authorized funding for PFAS remediation efforts. Additionally, several states have enacted laws to regulate PFAS use, disposal, and cleanup.
Litigation Trends
As communities affected by AFFF foam seek accountability and compensation for damages, litigation has evolved to encompass a wide range of defendants, including manufacturers, distributors, and users of AFFF products. Class actions and individual lawsuits alike have emerged as prominent strategies to address PFAS-related harms, with plaintiffs alleging negligence, failure to warn, and environmental harm.
- Expanding Defendants: AFFF lawsuits have targeted not only manufacturers of firefighting foam but also entities that used or distributed the product, such as military bases, airports, oil refineries, and firefighting agencies. Plaintiffs allege that these parties were aware of the risks associated with PFAS but failed to adequately warn or mitigate the harm caused by AFFF contamination.
- Class Actions and Individual Lawsuits: AFFF litigation includes both class action lawsuits, where groups of individuals collectively sue defendants, and individual lawsuits filed by affected individuals, businesses, or municipalities seeking compensation for specific damages. Class actions may offer efficiency in pursuing claims on behalf of large groups, while individual lawsuits allow plaintiffs to seek remedies tailored to their circumstances.
Implications and Considerations
Beyond seeking compensation for individuals harmed by PFAS exposure, AFFF lawsuits often entail broader implications, including environmental remediation efforts to address contaminated water sources and ecosystems. Moreover, these lawsuits prompt discussions on regulatory compliance and reform to enhance oversight of AFFF use, disposal, and cleanup. Three of the most important implications and considerations stemming from these lawsuits include:
- Environmental Remediation: AFFF lawsuits not only seek compensation for individuals harmed by PFAS contamination but also aim to fund environmental remediation efforts to clean up contaminated water supplies, soil, and ecosystems. Remediation costs can be substantial, and defendants may be required to contribute to cleanup efforts as part of legal settlements or court judgments.
- Public Health Concerns: The health effects of PFAS exposure continue to be a significant concern for communities affected by AFFF contamination. Medical monitoring programs may be established to assess and monitor the health of individuals exposed to PFAS and provide necessary medical care or interventions. Legal actions may also advocate for funding to support public health initiatives addressing PFAS-related health risks.
- Regulatory Compliance and Reform: AFFF litigation has prompted discussions about regulatory reforms to address PFAS contamination and improve oversight of firefighting foam use and disposal. Regulatory agencies may implement stricter standards for PFAS emissions, storage, and cleanup, while industries may seek alternatives to AFFF formulations containing PFAS to mitigate future liabilities.
Law Firms Should Continue to Monitor Ongoing Litigation
The landscape of AFFF firefighting foam lawsuits continues to evolve as affected communities seek accountability for PFAS contamination and pursue remedies for environmental and health damages. Moving forward, ongoing legal proceedings, regulatory reforms, and environmental remediation efforts will shape the outcomes and implications of AFFF lawsuits for years to come.
As such, it is more important than ever for law firms to stay up-to-date on the landscape surrounding AFFF lawsuits. As cases move forward, more clients may be inclined to come forward and pursue compensation for their injuries or losses related to PFAS in AFFF foam.
How Legal Conversion Center Can Help Your Law Firm Convert More AFFF Clients
If your law firm is looking to acquire AFFF lawsuit leads, LCC’s legal intake specialists and virtual receptionists can help. Our specialized legal call center can enhance your firm’s ability to attract and convert more AFFF lawsuit clients. We do this by providing personalized and responsive support to your potential clients that is seamlessly integrated into your existing intake process.
At LCC, we employ trained professionals who specialize in legal intake processes, enabling us to efficiently handle inquiries from individuals seeking representation for AFFF-related claims. By promptly answering calls, addressing inquiries, and guiding potential clients through the initial consultation process, a legal call center ensures that no lead goes unattended.
Learn more about how our streamlined intake process empowers law firms to capture and convert more clients than ever before. Give us a call for more information and a free quote.
