Jury Awards $10.5M in Punitive Damages Against DuPont

A federal court in Ohio delivered a verdict this week awarding $10.5 million in punitive damages to a man with testicular cancer who, for years, was…

A federal court in Ohio delivered a verdict this week awarding $10.5 million in punitive damages to a man with testicular cancer who, for years, was exposed through drinking water to the toxic chemicals DuPont used to make Teflon.

Altogether, Kenneth Vigneron Sr. was awarded $12.5 million in punitive and compensatory damages. The Ohio man says he got testicular cancer because he was exposed to the chemical known as C8 (or PFOA) through public water supplies in Belpre and Little Hocking – both towns are near the chemical company DuPont’s Washington Works facility in West Virginia.

Vigneron’s is the latest in a handful of cases that have already gone to trial against DuPont. Other verdicts also found the chemical company guilty of negligence and acting maliciously by knowingly contaminating water supplies. DuPont’s lawyers maintain that jurors have been misled about the risks of C8 exposure.

About 3,500 similar lawsuits are pending against the company.

A spin-off company, Chemours, which inherited many legacy responsibilities from DuPont, issued a statement saying DuPont will appeal the verdict, and that the majority of the thousands of pending lawsuits are residents who allege they have high cholesterol and thyroid disease – not cancer. The statement went on to say that Chemours is legally shielded from liability, should DuPont try to shift responsibility to the smaller company for final judgments.

Cynthia Salitsky, Chemours Spokesperson, released the following statement:

“We expect DuPont to appeal the verdict, subject to post-trial motions, to address important, unresolved issues that affect the broader, ongoing multi-district litigation (MDL).  Of the 3500 claims in the MDL, the majority allege high cholesterol and thyroid disease, not cancer diagnoses.  Each of these claims will be evaluated on an individual basis due to the unique facts present in every case. Litigation of this kind typically takes place over many years, and interim results do not predict the ultimate outcome.  As previously disclosed, DuPont is the named defendant in each of the cases and is liable for any judgment.  In the event DuPont claims it is entitled to indemnification from Chemours as to some or all of the judgment, Chemours retains its defenses to such claims.”

Judge Refuses to Dismiss 1st Test Case Against DuPont

A federal judge has refused to dismiss one of two test cases that could potentially help settle thousands of similar lawsuits against chemical giant…

A federal judge has refused to dismiss one of two test cases that could potentially help settle thousands of similar lawsuits against chemical giant DuPont.

The complaint by an Ohio woman alleges the Delaware-based company knew the potentially dangerous risks posed by a chemical its plant near Parkersburg, West Virginia, had been depositing into the Ohio River, but declined to inform the public.

The Columbus Dispatch reports that DuPont unsuccessfully asked judge Edmund Sargus on Thursday to dismiss the case.

Sargus agreed to read motions filed by DuPont that argue the evidence doesn’t support the awarding of punitive damages.

More than 3,500 lawsuits allege DuPont’s dumping of a chemical known as C8 into local drinking water caused diseases including cancer.

Exit mobile version