お知らせ • Jan 07
Montana Court Denies Motions to Dismiss Class-Action Lawsuit Fighting PFAS in Firefighter Turnout Gear
A Montana federal judge on January 6, 2026 denied motions to dismiss a class-action lawsuit brought by attorneys at law firms Hagens Berman, Heenan & Cook and Bliven Law Firm to combat toxic “forever chemicals” in firefighter turnout gear sold by DuPont/Chemours, 3M and other major corporations. The firms represent the city and county of Butte-Silver Bow, Montana, to assist them and other municipalities in abating the costly premature gear replacements faced due to the rampant health risks of perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS). Chief District Court Judge Brian Morris for the U.S District Court in Montana issued the 50-page order denying all motions to dismiss brought by several defendants. In part, the court declined to apply the indirect purchaser rule to dismiss a claim under the Racketeer Influenced Corrupt Organizations (RICO) Act until the Ninth Circuit rules in a pending case on whether that rule applies to RICO claims. Affected turnout gear is allegedly manufactured and sold by 3M and DuPont/Chemours, Corteva, Globe Manufacturing Company, W.L. Gore & Associates Inc. and Lion Group, the nation’s leading suppliers of fire-resistant gear. Defendants sought to dismiss claims on various grounds including traceability of the harms to defendants and standing under non-Montana state laws. “Plaintiff further connects the plausible links in the chain of traceability for all Defendants by alleging the collective enterprise of Defendants in concealing the known dangers of PFAS in the turnout gear,” the order states. The court denied defendants’ motion to dismiss non-Montana state law claims based on a lack of Article III standing. In addressing plaintiffs’ RICO claims, the court stated, “Plaintiff sufficiently have alleged that an enterprise existed,” adding that the court “denies Defendants’ motion to dismiss Plaintiff’s RICO claim without prejudice pending the Ninth Circuit’s decision in Biederman” regarding the application of the indirect-purchaser rule to RICO claims. The court rejected the defendants’ argument that they were engaging in ordinary commercial activities, explaining that “Defendants could not have achieved their goals of selling PFAS and turnout gear containing PFAS if Defendants’ knowledge of the harms of PFAS had been exposed. These actions by Defendants, allegedly acting together to conceal the known dangers of PFAS, do not constitute merely normal or ordinary commercial relationships.” “These allegations indicate a continuing effort of concealment by Defendants. Plaintiff alleges that Defendants have continued to conceal the dangers of PFAS to plausibly show ‘that persons associated with the enterprise engaged in a pattern of racketeering activity.” In denying defendants’ request to apply first-to-file rule, the court highlighted the complaint’s novel claims vis-à-vis other complaints concerning firefighter turnout gear, and its attempt to obtain efforts reimbursement for damages incurred by replacing affected turnout gear. The court previously allowed claims to continue in their current jurisdiction, deeming transfer improper and a stay inappropriate. The lawsuit was filed April 3, 2025, in the U.S. District Court for the District of Montana and alleges that more than one million firefighters face heightened risks due to contact with PFAS in the line of duty: up to 70% of firefighters are predicted to die eventually from cancer, significantly higher than the general population, according to the lawsuit. According to the class action, the manufacturers of firefighter turnout gear colluded in attempting to conceal the risks of PFAS in turnout gear, all the while failing to provide PFAS-free options, despite at all relevant times being technologically and economically feasible. To avoid PFAS exposure, fire departments, volunteer organizations and other firefighter response teams are faced with significant costs of premature replacement of affected turnout gear for their crews at the cost of at least $3,000 per firefighter, with many departments providing two suits for each firefighter, which consists of helmet, hood, jacket, pants, suspenders, boots, gloves and when needed, respirators. Attorneys estimate that with approximately 1,042,000 U.S. firefighters, replacement costs run into the billions.