City of Camden et al v. E.I. du Pont de Nemours & Company et al
Case Number:
2:23-cv-03230
Court:
Nature of Suit:
Multi Party Litigation:
Class Action
Judge:
Firms
- AltmanNewman
- Baron & Budd
- Bartkiewicz Kronick
- Burr & Forman
- Douglas & London
- FeganScott
- Goldfarb & Huck
- Horvitz & Levy
- Jones & Keller
- Keller Rohrback
- Kelley Drye
- Knauf Shaw
- Lieff Cabraser
- Marten Law LLP
- Napoli Shkolnik
- Rigano LLC
- Shook Hardy
- Singleton Schreiber
- Sonosky Chambers
Companies
- Association of California Water Agencies
- Corteva Inc.
- DuPont de Nemours Inc.
- Lakehaven Water & Sewer District
- Lower Colorado River Authority
- Metropolitan Water District of Southern California
- North Texas Municipal Water District
- The Chemours Co.
Government Agencies
Sectors & Industries:
-
April 23, 2024
Judge Allows $956M Atty Fees In 3M, DuPont PFAS Settlements
A South Carolina federal judge on Tuesday signed off on attorney fees totaling more than $956 million in settlements with 3M and DuPont over so-called forever chemicals in firefighting foam that contaminated drinking water, saying that another group of lawyers may not have been able to reach the same outcome.
-
March 18, 2024
Plaintiffs Call For Sanctions Over PFAS MDL Deal Threat
A proposed class in multidistrict litigation against DuPont and others alleging they contaminated drinking water with PFAS chemicals is urging a South Carolina federal court to sanction attorneys for a California water service, saying they violated court rules in their latest objections to a settlement.
-
October 16, 2023
Attorneys Seek $94 Million From DuPont PFAS Settlement
Attorneys representing municipalities suing DuPont and other chemical companies over contaminated drinking water from PFAS chemicals have asked a South Carolina federal judge for $94 million in attorney fees.
-
August 08, 2023
Five State AGs Say DuPont's $1.1B PFAS Deal Falls Short
Five state attorneys general have told a South Carolina federal court that they have concerns about a $1.18 billion settlement reached with DuPont, Chemours and Corteva over "forever chemicals," saying that while they do not oppose a preliminary approval of the deal, it should not serve as a benchmark for any future settlements.