Class Action Lawsuit Against 3M and Rhinelander Paper Mill will Stay in Wisconsin

SEATTLE (Scrap Monster): The Texas-based law firm Baron & Budd filed a class action lawsuit in August against Ahlstrom Rhinelander LLC and 3M Company for PFAS contamination on farm land in Oneida County that contaminated the well water of many residents. 3M then filed a motion to move the case to South Carolina. The motion was denied last week by the United States Judicial Panel on Multi-District Litigation.

“Keeping the litigation in Wisconsin will allow us to start discovery to better understand more details about what led to the contamination of our plaintiffs’ wells,” said Brett Land, the lead Baron & Budd attorney for the plaintiffs.

 3M wanted to move the case to be litigated with other PFAS-related cases being processed in South Carolina, a practice known as multi-district litigation. But those lawsuits focus on aqueous film-forming foams, known as AFFF’s, which have been used to fight fires at airports. Land said this case concerns the spreading of paper mill sludge and that moving the it didn't make sense.

“You know, our case really doesn’t relate to this AFFF, the firefighting foam, so our case really didn’t belong there,” said Land. “And then, in addition of course, we want to move this litigation along and if we’re in the MDL, we would not have been able to do that.”

Court documents showed that 3M argued that AFFF contamination of well water at Rhinelander / Oneida County Airport would cause for overlapping discovery in the case. But in the ruling last week, the Judicial Panel ruled that 3M did not meet a “significant burden” of showing that the transfer was necessary. Land said this will help the case advance in a timelier manner.

 “If the case would’ve been transferred to that [multi-district litigation], it would’ve been a lot longer before we could’ve engaged in active litigation on this case,” said Land. “And we want to get moving. And so, the best way to do that is to keep the case in Wisconsin and keep litigation going.”

3M told Newswatch12 in an email that they stand by their initial motion to move the case, adding that “3M will continue to address PFAS litigation by defending itself in court or through negotiated resolutions, all as appropriate.”

Courtesy: www.wjfw.com