We represent hundreds of families harmed by the damaging effects of ethylene oxide exposure in their communities, consumers and businesses whose local water supply was contaminated by a known toxic chemical, and property owners impacted by the flightpath of Navy fighter planes.


Representative cases and settlements include:

  • Representing state Attorneys General in their investigations into contamination and exposure issues resulting from a “forever chemical” commonly referred to as PFAS.
  • Representing a state Attorney General in investigating and potentially litigating matters related to the problematic use of a pesticide used in homes, on agricultural crops, lawns, and gardens, and as a fumigating agent—that is now known to have contaminated soil and groundwater.
  • Representing hundreds of individuals around the country that are suffering the ill- effects of ethylene oxide exposure—a gas commonly used in medical sterilization processes. We have brought over 100 personal injury and wrongful death cases against EtO emitters across the country, as well as numerous medical monitoring class actions. Brincks et al. v. Medline Indus., Inc., et al., No. 2020-L-008754 (Cir. Ct. Cook Cty., Ill.); Leslie v. Steris Isomedix Operations, Inc., et al., No. 20-cv-01654 (N.D. Ill.); Jackson v. 3M Company, et al., No. 19-cv-00522 (D.S.C.).
  • Representing individuals who have been exposed through their own drinking water and otherwise to PFAS and related “forever chemicals” used in various applications. This exposure has allegedly led to serious health issues, including cancer, as well as the devaluation of private property due to, among other things, the destruction of the water supply. In conjunction with our work in this space, we have been appointed to the Plaintiff’s Executive Committee in In re: Aqueous Film-Forming Foams (AFFF) Prods. Liability Litig., 18-mn-2873-RMG, MDL No. 2873 (D.S.C.).
  • Representing property owners on Whidbey Island, Washington, whose homes sit directly in the flightpath of dozens of Navy fighter planes. The Navy is alleged to have significantly increased the number of these planes at the bases at issue, as well as the frequency of their flights, to the detriment of our clients’ privacy and properties. Pickard v. USA, No. 19-1928L (Ct. Fed. Claims); Newkirk v. USA, No. 20- 628L (Ct. Fed. Claims).
  • Our team has been designated as Panel Members on a State Attorney General’s Environmental Counsel Panel.