In Re Teflon Products Liability Litigation

254 F.R.D. 354 (S.D. Iowa 2008)

Purchase the Printed Copy at bsmsphd.com

Nature of the Case

To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.

Facts

Ps seek certification of twenty-three classes of persons who acquired cookware coated with DuPont's (D) 'Teflon(R)' product. Ps allege that D made false, misleading and deceptive representations regarding the safety of its product. Studies have shown that D's product can decompose at temperatures within the realm of 'normal use,' potentially releasing a synthetic chemical known as perfluorooctanoic acid ('PFOA'). Exposure to PFOA, which also is referred to as ammonium perfluorooctanoate ('APFO'), or ('C-8'), may cause a flu-like condition known as 'polymer fume fever.' The EPA concluded that PFOA has the ability to cross the human placenta, potentially leading to birth defects. Ps alleged that D has been aware of potential health hazards from the use of NSCC since the 1950s or 1960s, but has represented to consumers that its product is completely safe. None of the proposed class representatives allege that he or she has been injured from the use of the materials. Each of the purported class actions seek recovery solely for economic damage, 'whether in the form of damages, statutory remedies, injunctive or equitable relief, or rescission, as opposed to damages for physical injury.' Ps sought injunctive relief. The causes of action included negligent misrepresentation, statutory violations, breach of express warranty, breach of implied warranty, declaratory judgment, injunction, failure to warn, false advertising, fraudulent concealment, negligent misrepresentation, negligence, strict liability, statutory unfair and deceptive trade practices, and unjust enrichment/restitution. Subclasses were defined as (1) All purchasers of cookware containing the non-stick coating labeled Teflon(R), Autograph(R), or Silverstone(R), and as to Silverstone(R), (2) All purchasers of brands, makes, product lines, and/or models of cookware containing D nonstick coating, whether branded with D trade names or not, and who continue to possess the cookware; (3) All purchasers or owners of cookware coated with D non-stick coating who do not qualify as members of Sub-Class 1 or 2. During discovery it was determined that few if any of the Ps had any documentation or even memory about when and where the alleged D products were purchased. D opposed certification.