Camp Lejeune Lawsuit News and Updates

This page provides Camp Lejeune lawsuit updates. Our lawyers are still working to give the latest update on the litigation, even though we are no longer taking new cases.

We also recently reopened the comments below to answer any questions you may have or just give you a chance to say what is on your mind.

Latest News on Camp Lejeune Water Contamination Lawsuit

November 21, 2024 – TPCA Lawsuit

In unrelated news, a federal judge in North Carolina has allowed a lawsuit to proceed against a group of law firms accused of making repeated unsolicited calls to a military veteran.

The lawsuit claims the firms promised to represent the veteran in claims related to toxic water exposure at Marine Corps Base Camp Lejeune, even though he was never stationed there. Allegations include urging the veteran to submit false information for a claim and offering a guaranteed payout of $150,000. Despite requesting no further contact, the veteran received dozens of additional calls, text messages, and a contingency agreement from the firms.

The judge found that the lawsuit sufficiently alleged violations of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA), citing the use of an illegal auto-dialer and a coordinated telemarketing effort. Claims under North Carolina’s Telephone Solicitations Act were also allowed to proceed, although the judge expressed doubts about the law’s application to out-of-state plaintiffs.

I have no idea about the merits of this case and I think the damages are minimal.  But the marketing in this litigation was certainly over-the-top.

November 13, 2024 – How the Government Is Defending These Lawsuits

Plaintiffs’ lawyers are asking the court to pull a case out of the priority trial pool. The plaintiff is very sick.  So the request aims to spare the plaintiff the physical and emotional toll of a high-stakes trial while his health continues to decline. The government, while acknowledging the plaintiff’s condition, is resisting the request.  Why?  Because it is a case the government thinks it has a better chance of winning/keeping the verdict down.

This is the problem. The government lawyers are more focused on defending itself vigorously against claims than on fulfilling the congressional mandate of the Camp Lejeune Justice Act.  You expect this garbage when suing Fortune 500 companies.  Those lawyers commonly prioritize every possible legal defense over humane and timely resolution. But that is not what Congress intended here and these kinds of tactics violate the spirit of the CLJA.

November 7, 2024 – Rules for Examinations

This Lejeune judges issued an order that  addresses procedures for expert medical examinations of plaintiffs involved in the case. In any litigation, defendants typically have the right under Rule 35 to request a physical examination of the plaintiff when the plaintiff’s physical or mental condition is at issue. This right gives the defendant the ability assess the claimed injuries.

Key elements of the order include:

1. Scope of Examinations: Plaintiffs who undergo evaluations by expert witnesses retained by plaintiffs’ attorneys must notify the government in advance. This gives the government the option to conduct independent medical exams but allows them to waive this right if they really do not need one.
2. Examination Notifications: To avoid unnecessary exams, the plaintiffs must inform the government in advance if an expert evaluating a plaintiff is expected to testify in court. If a non-testifying expert later becomes a testifying expert, the plaintiffs’ lawyers must promptly notify the government. The government then has 45 days from this notice to arrange its own examination if desired.
3. Procedural Standards: Both parties agree to certain procedural standards, including a remote format for exams (unless otherwise agreed) and limited scope focusing only on the injuries claimed in the lawsuit. Examinations may be recorded with consent, and plaintiffs can have a family member or a legal representative present, provided they do not interfere.
4. Restrictions on Testing: To protect plaintiffs, the order prohibits invasive procedures, such as blood draws, MRIs, and similar tests, during these examinations. Additionally, reports generated by each party’s experts must include detailed findings per Federal Rule 26(a)(2)(B).
5. Reciprocal Examination Rights: The government retains a reciprocal right to conduct examinations under the same guidelines, which helps maintain a balance in medical testimony used in court.

October 25, 2024 – Moving Towards Settlement

October 23, 2024 – Next Hearing

There is not a lot of news to report in this litigation. The early talk of transparency has not quite come to pass.

The next status conference is on November 6.

October 20, 2024 – Civilian Contractors

We have not talked much about civilian contractor claims.  Because of the long exposure period for many of these plaintiffs, these can be very strong cases.

In the Carter case that is one of the first set for trial, the family of a former civilian employee alleges the now-deceased employee was exposed to contaminated water while living and working at several locations on Camp Lejeune, including Hadnot Point, Mainside Barracks, Midway Park, and Paradise Point, from September 1972 through December 1987. The exposure allegedly caused the plaintiff to develop non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma in 2011 and non-cancer kidney disease in 2012, which led to his death in May 2022.

October 16. 2024 – Claims Count

There are now 2,185 filed lawsuits and still over 550,000 administrative claims with the Department of Navy. Some of these are duplicates, but we do not know how many.

October 15, 2024 – Type of Evidence of Contamination at Trial

The core legal battle now focuses on how the contamination at Camp Lejeune will be proven and what type of evidence will be allowed in court. Plaintiffs are pushing for a broad approach, arguing that the contamination and its impacts should include not just water quality but also vapor intrusion and emissions—critical details they believe are necessary to establish how dangerous the environment was for those exposed. The government is, not surprisingly,  trying to narrow the focus. It wants to focus just on evidence limited to the concentration of chemicals in the drinking water. This debate will be critical in shaping the trial outcomes, especially as they prepare for bellwether cases involving leukemia and non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma.

October 9, 2024 – Settlement Information

The court has ordered that the government provide timely updates on administrative settlements to aid the Settlement Masters and Settlement Liaison in their efforts to resolve the litigation. This information used to be in the joint status report, but the court asked the government to stop including it.

Now, on the same day the parties submit their joint status report for each required status conference, the defendant must email a notice to the Settlement Masters, the Settlement Liaison, and the Plaintiffs’ Leadership Group. This notice must include the number of CLJA administrative claims that have been settled and the number of outstanding offers to settle such claims.

Our take is that there should be a transparent process, and this should be included in the status reports that the public consumes.  The defendant is the government, not Exxon.  But that wisdom will not carry the day.

October 3, 2024 – CMO #14 Continued

As we talked about in the September 22 update below, the government responded to the court’s previous order about possible changes to Case Management Order No. 14. The government said it had reached an agreement with the Settlement Masters on how information would be shared with them. Because of this agreement, the government believes that changes to Case Management Order No. 14 are not necessary.

The Lejeune judges have received a copy of this agreement, which is called a “Memorandum of Understanding” (MOU). Today, they said they will wait before making any changes to Case Management Order No. 14. The court wants to evaluate whether the MOU will be used in a way that keeps the settlement process moving quickly and smoothly, without unnecessary delays or restrictions on how information is handled.

The four judges administering these cases do want to get a settlement deal done and want to clear out as many obstacles in that path that they can.

September 25, 2024 – Status Hearing

Yesterday, there was a status hearing on discovery issues. The next conference will be on October 22, 2024.

One update we missed last month is the National Academy of Sciences’ motion to quash a subpoena related to its 2009 report on contaminated water at Camp Lejeune that we discussed on June 8. The Plaintiffs’ Leadership Group sought documents related to the report, but NAS resisted, citing confidentiality and privilege regarding its internal deliberations.

Judge Jones sided with the plaintiffs, ordering NAS to produce a detailed privilege log for withheld documents within 14 days. The court emphasized that NAS must comply with federal discovery rules, despite its confidentiality concerns.

September 22, 2024 – Settlement Master/Gov’t Information Problem Solved

After consulting with the Settlement Masters, the United States agreed on procedures that allow its counsel to engage with the Settlement Masters while safeguarding government information.  (See the September 4 update below that explains the issue.)

Glad this is resolved, but I hope this is not a harbinger of more nonsensical roadblocks in the future.

September 18, 2024 – Final Administrative Claim Count

There are over 550,000 administrative claims filed with the Department of Navy, which is focused on finalizing data entry and addressing duplicate claims. I’m not sure why we do not have an exact number.

A total of 2,089 lawsuits have been filed under the Camp Lejeune Justice Act (CLJA) as of September 2024  Sixty-six of those cases have been dismissed.

September 11, 2024 – Estate Issue Solved (a little)

Even before the PACT act passed, we have been saying that Parkinson’s disease claims are among the strongest claims in this litigation. A recent study conducted by researchers at the University of California, San Francisco, adds more weight to the science behind these claims. Researchers found that exposure to volatile organic compounds (VOCs), including trichloroethylene, in the water at Camp Lejeune, North Carolina, may accelerate the progression of Parkinson’s disease.

The study analyzed a cohort of over 172,000 Marines who resided at the base between 1975 and 1985. Among the 270 individuals with Parkinson’s were identified, 65.6% were exposed to VOCs at levels exceeding the permissible limit. The findings suggest that those exposed to VOCs experienced faster progression of Parkinson’s disease, with a higher risk of psychosis, fractures, falls, and shorter time to these events compared to those unexposed.

The study, supported by the Department of Veterans Affairs, highlights a significant dose-response relationship, particularly in the time to falls, and concludes that PD progression may be accelerated by prior environmental exposures.

September 4, 2024 – Trying to Get Settlement Moving Forward

The court is considering modifying the Case Management Order No. 14 to improve the efficiency of settlement processes in this litigation and help resolve some hang-ups the DOJ has about using equipment supplied by the DOJ to get the settlement ball moving forward.

Specifically, the proposed amendments focus on the protocols concerning how Settlement Masters access and handle DOJ data:

1. Data Security and Equipment Use: The amendments propose that Settlement Masters and their staff may use their own technology and equipment, provided these meet reasonable security measures as per the Amended Protective Order. This change means they will no longer be required to use equipment supplied by the Department of Justice, thus avoiding the constraints of DOJ-specific rules and Federal Acquisition Regulations.
2. Contractual Terms for Appointment: Another proposed amendment concerns the conditions under which Settlement Masters are appointed. The current requirement that the appointment of Mr. Perrelli and Mr. Oprison as Settlement Masters is contingent on contractual agreements over payment terms will be broadened. The amendment clarifies that these contractual terms will not cover the type, features, or source of technology or equipment used to access DOJ information. This change aims to remove technology or equipment specifications as barriers in the contracting process, facilitating easier entry into substantive settlement discussions.

The judge are asking for comments on these proposed amendments are due one week from its issuance yesterday.

August 27, 2024 – Status Conference

There was a status conference this morning.

August 21, 2024 – Over 500,000 Administrative Claims

Approximately 546,500 administrative claims have been filed with the Department of Navy under the Camp Lejeune Justice Act.

Let’s be realistic. Given the population size and the duration over which the contamination occurred, it is improbable that over half a million people suffered direct injuries.  This number is certainly inflated with duplicates and claims that are simply not viable.

August 20, 2024 – All 100 Plaintiffs Deposed

The government has completed all 100 depositions of the Track 1 Discovery Plaintiffs.

August 17, 2024 – How Many Filed Claims?

August 15, 2024 – Moving Settlement Forward

Plaintiffs’ lawyers are again complaining about the DOJ’s failure to produce documents despite numerous requests for documents from the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, the Department of Veterans Affairs, and the Naval Facilities Engineering Systems Command, the government has not produced the necessary materials.

Witnesses have indicated they possess relevant records, but these have not been provided, causing significant delays in discovery and depositions. The plaintiffs argue that the government’s failure to comply with document requests is creating an unfair disadvantage and request a court order to mandate the release of all non-privileged documents and a log of any documents withheld.

I saw a quote earlier in the week from a congressperson – I can’t remember who it was – who said that the government is defending these lawsuits like they were a tobacco company.

I’m saying that less judgmentally than it sounds. There are good lawyers and decent people defending these cases. They reflexively do what lawyers do which is fight as hard as they can.

But they are playing the wrong game here. Congress passed the law allowing Camp Lejeune victims to sue with the clear intent of providing justice and compensation to those affected. The government’s role should be to facilitate this process, not to obstruct it by employing the aggressive tactics you see in corporate litigation. The government is not 3M. Upholding the spirit of the law means working towards just outcomes for the victims, not focusing on technicalities or legal loopholes to avoid responsibility which the DOJ has done to some extent.

August 9, 2024 – Changes to Monthly Status Conferences

The court, on its own initiative, is addressing the future status conferences for the Camp Lejeune Water Litigation. Regular status conferences have been held where parties provided updates, including on settlement efforts. With the recent appointment of Settlement Masters and a Settlement Liaison, updates on settlement efforts are no longer required in status reports or during conferences. So you will no longer see those in our updates.

The parties have also been updating the court on stipulations since the last conference, which have been less thorough than expected. Due to these challenges, a pretrial schedule for expert discovery and briefing on Track 1 issues has been set. The court has emphasized the need for a detailed discussion on the order of proof for CLJA bench trials and has asked the parties to confer on this and report their progress in the next Status Report due August 20, 2024. The next status conference is set for August 27, 2024, in Wilmington.

August 8, 2024: Plan from Here

With fact discovery concluding next week, it is time to get moving towards getting expert testimony ready for trial. A timeline has been established for the expert discovery phase in the Track 1 lawsuits that are going first.  Plaintiffs are set to reveal their experts on toxic chemical exposure within 75 days, followed by the United States disclosing its experts 45 days later. Plaintiffs will then have 21 days to present their rebuttal experts.

Parallel schedules have been arranged for the phases covering general causation, specific causation, and damages.  Each phase of expert discovery must be finalized within 45 days after the disclosures. Subsequently, Daubert motions and motions for summary judgment must be submitted within 30 days of the end of expert discovery. Parties will have a 21-day window to file oppositions to these motions, and an additional 14 days to submit replies.

August 7, 2024 – No Longer Accepting Camp Lejeune Cases

The 2-year deadline for victims to file claims under the Camp Lejeune Justice Act of 2022 expired yesterday. This means that all future claims regarding injuries caused by the toxic water at Camp Lejeune are time-barred. Our firm is no longer accepting new Camp Lejeune cases.

July 31, 2024 – Sign #344,334 That Elective Option Is Not Working

We have total Lejeune settlements totaling only $23.4 million.

We think settlement talks will get a lot more serious in 11 days.

July 30, 2024 – Judge Bars Camp Lejeune Settlement Talks Leaks

Yesterday, a Magistrate Judge issued an Order prohibiting the parties from making public statements or disclosures about the ongoing global settlement negotiations. The Order specifically aimed at preventing the parties from discussing the progress of the settlement talks in their monthly status reports, which are filed and publicly accessible on PACER.

Why? The restrictions on disclosing Lejeune settlement talk information during status conferences and in joint status reports aim to protect the integrity of settlement negotiations.

This confidentiality helps ensure that the parties can freely discuss and negotiate settlements without concerns that sensitive details might influence judicial proceedings or become public.

Such measures typically encourage open and honest communication during settlement discussions, potentially facilitating more effective and fair resolutions. The exclusion of the court from receiving this information prevents any perceived or actual bias, ensuring the court’s impartiality in the proceedings.

July 24, 2024 – Competing Trial Plans

Camp Lejeune plaintiffs’ lawyers and the government have submitted different proposals yesterday for the pretrial scheduling order in these case that are heading towards trial.  Plaintiffs proposal emphasizes completing expert discovery promptly, setting deadlines for expert discovery, dispositive motions practice, and trial commencement by the spring of 2025.

They propose shortening the DOJ’s time to disclose responsive experts from 45 to 30 days in the water contamination phase and suggest a briefing schedule for Daubert and dispositive motions that deviates from the Local Rule, allowing only 14 days for reply briefs for non-discovery motions. Additionally, the plaintiffs plans to disclose specific causation and damages experts for individual plaintiffs by November 19, 2024, requiring the DOJ to disclose its responsive experts within 30 days of their disclosures for each plaintiff.

In contrast, the government’s proposal retains all previously negotiated discovery and briefing deadlines, adding a residual expert discovery phase to avoid reopening expert discovery, which was a concern the judges had. Their phased discovery approach starts with water contamination and general causation, followed by specific causation and damages.

The key differences between the two proposals include the timelines for expert discovery, with the plaintiffs proposing a more accelerated timeline.  In other words, the government’s plan aims to slow the train down. Plaintiffs want to get trials as soon as possible.

July 18, 2024 – Win for Plaintiffs – Opt-Out Ruling Affirmed

Seven months ago, the government filed a motion to amend Case Management Order No. 2.  It wanted four things: (1) mandate that every plaintiff file a short form complaint, (2) removal of the opt-out provision for Track 2 and future track plaintiffs, (3) extending Track 1 fact discovery by 90 days, and (4) requiring prompt notification if any plaintiff undergoes or will undergo an expert examination.

In February, the court issued Case Management Order No. 10, giving the government some of what it wanted. The court sensibly required all plaintiffs to file a short form complaint. But it retained the opt-out provision for Track 2 and future plaintiffs, declined to extend Track 1 discovery, and deferred the ruling on the expert examination notification requirement.

In April, and we wrote about it in the April 17th update, the DOJ sought reconsideration of the decision to keep the opt-out provision. The government argued that a significant number of Track 2 plaintiffs opting out had skewed the representative sample needed for fair litigation.

It took the court a while, obviously, but in a new ruling yesterday the judges denied this motion for reconsideration. The judges emphasized that the existing Track 2 pool still contained enough cases to maintain a representative sample and found no compelling new evidence to warrant a change in the order. The court maintained that accommodations could be made for plaintiffs unable to participate fully in discovery or trial without necessitating the removal of the opt-out provision.

July 13, 2024 – Plaintiffs’ Proposed Track One Schedule

The parties have jointly proposed this schedule to the court:

This schedule will likely push the first trial well into 2025.

July 12, 2024:  Settlements Masters Finally Appointed

The North Carolina judges have appointed Thomas J. Perrelli of Jenner & Block LLP and Christopher G. Oprison of DLA Piper as settlement masters to facilitate settlement discussions.  Magistrate Judge James E. Gates has also been appointed as settlement liaison to assist.

The court is tasking these settlement masters with establishing a settlement structure for the Camp Lejeune Justice Act cases and facilitating discussions between the parties. They will not act as advocates or have coercive authority so no one is going to be cramming a settlement down anyone’s throats. Their authority is limited to facilitating settlement discussions and does not extend to adjudicating any issues in the litigation. But they will work to develop a unified approach to the Herculean task of getting the majority of these lawsuits settled.

The deadline to bring a Camp Lejeune lawsuit is approaching, and the DOJ is feeling the pressure of trials.  It is time to throw away the Elective Option and make a real run and get Camp Lejeune settlements en masse.

July 10, 2024: Update on Settlement Payouts

According to the latest joint status report, there are 93 Camp Lejeune cases currently in litigation that qualify for the government’s elective early settlement program. So far, 37 of these cases have accepted early settlement offers, with payouts ranging from $100,000 to $450,000. In nine cases, the elective settlement offers have been rejected, while 26 offers are still pending.

Outside of the elective early settlement program, the government has made settlement offers to 111 individual plaintiffs after verifying their claims. 58 of these settlement offers have been accepted, and 3 have been rejected. Payments totaling just over $20 million have already been sent out to 81 of these plaintiffs – an average of about $246,000 per plaintiff. Bladder cancer claims have had the highest average per claim payout value.

July 9, 2024: Racing to the Finish Line

When we last reported on June 22, 1,825 civil lawsuits were filed.  That number has gone up just a bit to 1,851 lawsuits.

Administrative claims is another matter. They continue to surge. Two weeks ago, 261,293 claims were filed with the Navy under the CLJA. This number has surged to approximately 285,484 claims. That is 24,292 more claims in just two weeks.

Everyone keeps asking is how many of these over 285,000 claims are viable and how many of them are for injuries that could never be related to Camp Lejeune?  Right now, no one knows that answer.

June 29, 2024 – General Causation Before Trial Motion

The North Carolina judges have decided independently that they want to resolve two critical issues before the first trials: toxic chemical exposure from the water at Camp Lejeune and general causation for the Track I Illnesses.

The plaintiffs’ first task is to establish the presence and levels of alleged chemicals in the water at Camp Lejeune from 1953 to 1987, such as benzene, TCE, PCE, and vinyl chloride. This involves proving the contamination levels at various water distribution systems. Ridiculously, the government has not agreed to stipulate to this.

Secondly, plaintiffs must meet their general causation burden by proving a causal relationship between the chemicals in the water and the Track I Illnesses (bladder cancer, kidney cancer, leukemia, Parkinson’s disease, and non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma). The court will expedite expert discovery limited to these issues, followed by potential Daubert and dispositive motion briefings.

The parties have been ordered to meet and confer to resolve these Track I issues. They are required to jointly submit a proposed pretrial schedule by July 12, 2024, which will include timelines for limited expert discovery and necessary briefings.

The good news is this will streamline trials to allow for shorter trials that we can hopefully try back-to-back-to-back.

June 18, 2024 – Plaintiffs’ Bellwether Picks

Plaintiffs have their picks for the bellwether trial:

Bladder Cancer

• Criswell v. USA, Case No. 7:23-cv-01482-BO-BM
• Dyer v. USA, Case No. 7:23-cv-00357-D-RJ
• Cagiano v. USA, Case No. 7:23-cv-00569-BO-RN

Kidney Cancer

• Mousser v. USA, Case No. 7:23-cv-00667-D-RN
• Howard v. USA, Case No. 7:23-cv-00490-FL
• Fancher v. USA, Case No. 7:23-cv-00275-M-BM

Leukemia

• Gleesing v. USA, Case No. 7:23-cv-01486-FL
• Connard v. USA, Case No. 7:23-cv-01557-M-RN
• Hill v. USA, Case No. 7:23-cv-00028-M-KS

Non-Hodgkin’s Lymphoma

• Carter v. USA, Case No. 7:23-cv-01565-M-KS
• Kidd v. USA, Case No. 7:23-cv-01489-FL
• Davis v. USA, Case No. 7:23-cv-00043-BO-BM

Parkinson’s Disease

• Peterson v. USA, Case No. 7:23-cv-01576-M-RJ
• McElhiney v. USA, Case No. 7:23-cv-01368-BO-RJ
• Rothchild v. USA, Case No. 7:23-cv-00858-D-KS

See our June 11, 2024 update for more background.

June 12, 2024 – A Discovery Win

The magistrate judge overseeing the discovery in this litigation ruled for the plaintiffs yesterday, finding that Dr. Christopher Portier’s testimony will go forward. The judge found Dr. Portier’s testimony relevant – it is hard to imagine finding otherwise – and that the government’s claim of undue burden and expenses of attending Dr. Portier’s deposition in Italy were ill-founded. The court highlighted that travel costs alone are insufficient grounds to prevent the deposition, especially given the significant potential impact of Dr. Portier’s testimony on all claimants.

The court also addressed concerns regarding compliance with international law, with plaintiffs accepting the responsibility to ensure all Italian legal requirements are met. Consequently, the motion to prevent Dr. Portier’s deposition was denied.

You can find more background information on this motion for a protective order to quash the deposition in the May 31st summary below.

June 11, 2024 – Court Approves Track 1 Plan

The court approved the joint motion we discussed last week in the June 4th update yesterday. So we will soon know which five Lejeune lawsuits will be heading for trial first. Plaintiffs’ lawyers must pick the three cases from the list they want to go to trial in the next five days.

June 8, 2024 – NAS Discovery

The National Academy of Sciences (NAS) is a private, nonprofit institution established to provide expert advice on scientific issues.

The NAS conducted a study sponsored by the Navy in 2009 to investigate the links between adverse health effects and contaminated water at Camp Lejeune. The plaintiffs served a subpoena to the NAS, asking for the report and related documents in an effort to get to the truth. Curiously, the NAS has refused to produce the documents. There is a motion to compel pending, and the court is expected to hear the motion on Wednesday.