959 F.3d 70
2d Cir.2020Background:
- Putative class: all owners/renters of real property in Hoosick Falls, NY, and anyone who consumed Village water and shows elevated blood levels of PFOA.
- Defendants: Saint-Gobain (current owner) and Honeywell (former owner) of a Village manufacturing facility alleged to have used/disposed of PFOA that contaminated the water supply.
- Plaintiffs allege negligent use/disposal caused PFOA to accumulate in blood (increasing future illness risk) and caused property damage (contaminated wells, diminished use/value).
- District Court (Baker I) denied defendants’ Rule 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss claims for negligence, strict liability (personal injury and property), trespass, private nuisance, and for medical monitoring as consequential damages.
- Defendants appealed under 28 U.S.C. § 1292(b); the Second Circuit, after considering related Benoit appeals, affirmed denial of dismissal for personal injury, property damage, trespass, nuisance, and medical monitoring tied to personal injury, but dismissed as improvidently allowed the interlocutory appeal challenging medical monitoring as a remedy for property-only injury.
Issues:
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Personal-injury claims based on elevated PFOA levels | Elevated PFOA in blood is an actionable physical injury/increased risk justifying negligence/strict liability claims | Mere exposure/elevated levels absent manifest disease do not state a legal injury | Denial of dismissal affirmed; personal-injury claims sufficiently pleaded |
| Property-damage claims from water contamination | Contamination of wells and diminished use/value constitute property damage | No present/manifest physical injury to property—only risk or trace contamination | Denial of dismissal affirmed; property-damage claims survive pleading challenge |
| Trespass and private-nuisance for private-well contamination | Contamination of privately owned wells constitutes actionable trespass and nuisance | No actionable invasion or adequate pleading to state these torts | Denial of dismissal affirmed; trespass and nuisance claims survive |
| Availability of medical-monitoring damages (for personal injury and for property-only injury) | Medical monitoring is appropriate consequential relief for increased risk from PFOA exposure; available for both personal and property claims | Medical monitoring is not recoverable absent manifest physical injury; not available for property-only claims | Medical monitoring as relief for personal-injury claims allowed; interlocutory appeal as to medical monitoring for property-only claims dismissed as improvidently granted (not within §1292(b) review) |
Key Cases Cited
- Baker v. Saint-Gobain Performance Plastics Corp., 232 F. Supp. 3d 233 (N.D.N.Y. 2017) (district court opinion denying defendants’ motion to dismiss the pleaded claims)