The Legal Battle Against Harmful Products: Notable Cases in Litigation Now

September 26, 2023

The legal landscape is currently witnessing a massive shift as the battle against harmful products takes center stage. One such fight that has garnered significant attention involves Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS), a class of chemicals found in a vast array of everyday items. The lawsuits connected to these substances have become a point of interest in the legal world, potentially setting a precedent for future litigation.


PFAS, also known as "forever chemicals" due to their persistence in the environment, are found in thousands of products ranging from food packaging, clothing, cosmetics, contact lenses, wall paint, to cookware. These chemicals pose significant health risks, including decreased fertility, high blood pressure in pregnant people, increased risk of certain cancers, developmental delays and low birthweight in children, hormonal disruption, high cholesterol, and reduced effectiveness of the immune system.


The major manufacturers of PFAS in the U.S., DuPont and its spinoffs Chemours and Corteva, and 3M, have faced a multitude of lawsuits. Currently, there are more than 15,000 claims filed nationwide against these companies. So far, they have paid a total of nearly $11.5 billion in damages for PFAS contamination.


The scale of these lawsuits draws parallels with the historic Big Tobacco settlement of the 1990s. The tobacco industry had to pay more than $200 billion in damages, a figure that the PFAS cases could potentially exceed given the ubiquitous presence of these chemicals.


“None of us even knew we were being exposed to these chemicals. We were all being involuntarily contaminated, so it’s potentially much larger in scope and scale [than the tobacco settlement.]” says Rob Bilott, an environmental lawyer who has been working on PFAS cases for over 25 years.


A noteworthy aspect of this legal battle lies in the long history of deception by the chemical companies. Internal documents suggest that these companies knew about the dangers of PFAS as early as the 1960s but did not disclose this information. This lack of transparency has resulted in a significant amount of civil liability for the manufacturers.


The current wave of PFAS lawsuits is only the beginning. There are still numerous public water systems and potentially millions of individuals who could file suits in the future. The litigation process for these cases is likely to be complex and time-consuming, involving multidistrict litigation (MDL) in which similar suits are consolidated for trial before a single judge in a single court.


The unfolding legal battle against harmful products, notably PFAS, indicates a shift in litigation. It highlights the need for transparency from manufacturers and underlines the importance of regulatory oversight in ensuring public safety. It also signals a potential paradigm shift in how we approach accountability for harmful products in the future.


As we move forward, the role of the legal system in holding corporations accountable for the health and environmental impacts of their products will undoubtedly continue to evolve. The PFAS lawsuits serve as a stark reminder of the power of litigation in driving corporate responsibility and safeguarding public health.


The fight against harmful products is far from over. It is a battle that will continue to shape the legal landscape, prompting us to reassess our relationship with the products we use daily and the companies that manufacture them.


While this article provides general legal information, it does not constitute legal advice. The best way to get guidance on your specific legal issue is to contact a lawyer.


Contact Us

By submitting this form you agree to receive text messages.

By Rebecca Rivera December 9, 2025
As reported in the Washington Post December 5th, 2025 by Amudalat Ajasa A prominent scientific journal, Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology, has retracted a widely cited 2000 study that previously concluded the active ingredient in Roundup, glyphosate, posed no cancer risk to humans. The retraction was initiated after evidence emerged suggesting the study was heavily influenced by the herbicide's seller, Monsanto (now owned by Bayer), in an apparent effort to disguise potential health risks. Specific concerns cited by the journal include the strong possibility that Monsanto employees contributed to the writing without proper acknowledgment, that the authors may have received undisclosed payments from the company , and that the findings were based solely on unpublished Monsanto studies. This misconduct, discovered through internal company emails during federal litigation, is significant because the faulty research served as a bedrock for regulatory decisions regarding glyphosate for decades. Summary of Alleged Faulty Study and Monsanto's Influence The Study and Its Conclusion: The retracted paper, published in 2000, was a "bedrock study" that concluded: "under present and expected conditions of new use, there is no potential for Roundup herbicide to pose a health risk to humans." The Retraction: The scientific journal retracted the study due to a loss of confidence in its results and conclusions, citing the need to "maintain the integrity of the journal." Evidence of Undisclosed Influence: The co-editor in chief cited evidence suggesting that Monsanto employees "may have contributed to the writing of the article without proper acknowledgment as co authors." Undisclosed Payments: The retraction also noted that the study's authors may have been paid by Monsanto without disclosing it . Basis of Findings: The journal stated that the study's findings about cancer risk were "solely based on unpublished studies from Monsanto." Discovery of Influence: Monsanto's influence over the study was reportedly discovered through internal emails released during federal litigation against the company in 2017. Impact: The study "had a significant impact on regulatory decision-making regarding glyphosate and Roundup for decades," and was one of the most-cited papers on glyphosate safety, underpinning federal regulations for the pesticide. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) even cited it in its 2016 review of glyphosate. Context and Aftermath Bayer's Defense: Bayer (which acquired Monsanto in 2018) defended the chemical's safety and argued that Monsanto's involvement was appropriately cited in the acknowledgments, stating that glyphosate is the most extensively studied herbicide and that the "vast majority of published studies on glyphosate had no Monsanto involvement." Regulatory Stance: The EPA stated the retraction would not affect its current stance —which is that glyphosate is "not likely to be carcinogenic to humans"—because the agency does not directly rely on review articles like this one, but uses them to find other relevant individual studies. Litigation: Bayer has spent approximately $10 billion to settle lawsuits arguing the company did not warn customers about the negative health impacts of using Roundup. Read the full article in the Washington Post
By Rebecca Rivera November 14, 2025
In this series premiere episode, Founder & President of SOSCSA, Child Sexual Abuse Survivor & BSA Bankruptcy Claimant, Curtis Garrison interviews attorney Jason J Joy for an update on the BSA bankruptcy and discussing childhood abuse litigation for which Jason is an outspoken and experienced advocate. Jason's firm is actively litigating cases for many clients his law firm represents. This podcast is recommended for clients already represented, and for those who are still contemplating coming forward to establish a claim. Topics covered in this episode: Recent BSA Bankruptcy Trust report Lajun Claimants (Guam) v. Boy Scouts of America and their recent Petition For A Writ Of Certiorari to the U.S. Supreme Court The 1.5% initial payment, possible second payment time / total percentage Future Claims, BSA Councils, BSA Charters (churches, schools, etc) which there are over 100,000 entities possibly getting free of liability Mixed Claims explained We did not vote for this plan, they promised we would be paid in “Paid in Full” Plans to file an Amicus Brief Statute of Limitations 
By Rebecca Rivera November 6, 2025
The Boy Scouts of America bankruptcy case, involving tens of thousands of survivors of childhood sexual abuse, is among the largest and most contentious mass tort proceedings in U.S. history. In this podcast, Attorney Jason Joy breaks down the latest ruling from the Third Circuit Court, which leaves many survivors of childhood sexual abuse with drastically underfunded compensation.