Kimberly-Clark’s New Milford, Conn. Facility Contaminated Local Properties with Toxic PFAS, Class Action Alleges
Last Updated on July 17, 2024
DePaul et al. v. Kimberly-Clark Corporation
Filed: February 28, 2024 ◆§ 3:24-cv-00271
A class action alleges Kimberly-Clark’s negligent operation of its Connecticut manufacturing facility has contaminated nearby properties with toxic PFAS.
Connecticut
A proposed class action alleges Kimberly-Clark Corporation’s negligent operation of its New Milford, Connecticut, manufacturing facility has contaminated nearby properties with toxic per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS).
Want to stay in the loop on class actions that matter to you? Sign up for ClassAction.org’s free weekly newsletter here.
The 40-page forever chemicals lawsuit claims Kimberly-Clark makes products at the New Milford facility, such as Huggies diapers and Kleenex and Scott tissues, that are known to commonly incorporate PFAS in their manufacturing processes. The suit contends that the facility’s stack emissions have caused the chemicals to go “airborne, travel, and ultimately deposit” dangerous levels of PFAS into the soil and drinking water wells belonging to neighboring residents.
According to the filing, PFAS are a large group of artificial chemicals that have been used since at least the 1940s to make a wide variety of products resistant to water, dirt, oil, grease and heat. Often referred to as “forever chemicals,” PFAS do not break down under typical environmental conditions and can accumulate in the human body over time, the suit says.
The complaint stresses that exposure to PFAS has been linked to a host of negative health effects, including various types of cancer, decreased fertility, developmental delays in children, suppressed immune function, higher cholesterol levels and more.
Per the case, two of the plaintiffs are New Milford residents who live within three miles of the defendant’s facility. The plaintiffs claim that in 2023, laboratory analysis of soil samples taken throughout the area surrounding the facility, as well as testing of the drinking water in their private wells, revealed concentrations of PFAS recognized by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency as harmful to human health.
“The predominant winds and topography of the area mean that similar PFAS chemical concentrations would likely be observed in the water found in drinking water wells located near [the plaintiffs’] drinking water wells,” the lawsuit says.
The complaint alleges that these test results can be traced back to Kimberly-Clark’s failure to implement proper procedures to prevent, control or eliminate its release of PFAS into the environment.
“Kimberly-Clark’s conduct caused [the plaintiffs] and the members of the class to unknowingly ingest and absorb PFAS chemicals including by, but not limited to, ingesting PFAS-contaminated drinking water originating from PFAS-contaminated drinking water wells located on their own properties and others located in New Milford, Connecticut, ingesting food cooked with this water, and ingesting food grown in soil contaminated with PFAS chemicals,” the filing contends.
The case stresses that the company has substantially increased New Milford residents’ risk of developing cancers and other conditions associated with PFAS exposure. What’s more, residents whose properties have been contaminated can no longer enjoy their natural water sources for drinking, cooking or other ordinary household uses, the complaint notes.
The lawsuit looks to represent anyone who, during the applicable statute of limitations period, owned real property located in New Milford, Connecticut, or surrounding towns whose land and/or water supply have been contaminated with detectable levels of PFAS as a result of Kimberly-Clark’s allegedly improper use and/or disposal of the chemicals.
The suit also seeks to cover anyone who, during the applicable statute of limitations period, resided at a home in New Milford, Connecticut, or surrounding towns and ingested PFAS-contaminated water such that PFAS accumulated in their body and tissue. This also includes any natural child born to a resident who meets and/or met these criteria at the time of the child’s birth.
Get class action lawsuit news sent to your inbox – sign up for ClassAction.org’s free weekly newsletter here.
Hair Relaxer Lawsuits
Women who developed ovarian or uterine cancer after using hair relaxers such as Dark & Lovely and Motions may now have an opportunity to take legal action.
Read more here: Hair Relaxer Cancer Lawsuits
How Do I Join a Class Action Lawsuit?
Did you know there's usually nothing you need to do to join, sign up for, or add your name to new class action lawsuits when they're initially filed?
Read more here: How Do I Join a Class Action Lawsuit?
Stay Current
Sign Up For
Our Newsletter
New cases and investigations, settlement deadlines, and news straight to your inbox.
Before commenting, please review our comment policy.