In a recent development, the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit has overturned a district court’s decision to certify a large-scale class action lawsuit implicating contamination of blood with PFAS/PFOA (Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances). The class comprised an estimated 11.8 million individuals, representing all residents of Ohio. According to the court’s directive, the lower court must now dismiss the lawsuit on account of insufficient standing.
The exceedingly ambitious lawsuit was originally initiated on an even broader scale, with the plaintiff aiming to represent every single resident within the United States. This attempted scope tapering down to residents of the single state of Ohio has not been enough to secure standing. The Sixth Circuit’s decision to reject the class action emphasizes a significant precedence in the stringency of class certification.
This litigation comes in the wake of rising awareness and concern towards the health implications posed by PFAS, a group of man-made chemicals that have been found in a variety of sources ranging from food packaging to industrial facilities. Their ubiquity and persistence led to their common moniker as “forever chemicals”. As scientific knowledge around the potential health impact of PFAS grows, so does the potential for associated legal action.
It is expected that the Sixth Circuit’s decision will have critical implications for the future of “forever chemicals” litigation, particularly as it pertains to the certification of class action lawsuits. The court’s expressed concern on justification in class representation could foster a heightened level of scrutiny on class definition in future claim proceedings, necessitating legal professionals to carefully consider and craft execution strategies. Information used in this article was obtained from Harris Beach PLLC.