Camp Lejeune Lawsuit News and Updates

Our lawyers represent victims seeking a Camp Lejeune lawsuit in all 50 states.

This page provides more comprehensive and updated information on Camp Lejeune claims:

1. The latest news and updates on the Camp Lejeune lawsuit
2. Who is eligible for compensation
3. Projected per-person Camp Lejeune settlement amounts based on the type of claim
4. How we can help you bring a suit to receive the compensation you deserve

We understand this process is confusing for many who have suffered so much. So our lawyers provide a new update almost daily to give you the latest news on the litigation. 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.

Our last Camp Lejeune lawsuit update was on July 25, 2024, at 6:52 p.m.

If you have a potential Camp Lejeune lawsuit for the injury or death of a loved one, call our lawyers today at 800-553-8082 or get a free online consultation. There is no fee or cost unless you get financial compensation for the harm that was done to you.  Time is running out.

Latest News on Camp Lejeune Water Contamination Lawsuit

Before we discuss the Camp Lejeune lawsuits and our lawyers’ estimates of expected settlement amounts, let’s examine the latest news in the toxic water lawsuits.

July 25, 2024 – Our Law Firm Is Still Taking New Cases

It is absolutely shocking to me how many people calling in at the 11th hour with some very good Camp Lejeune lawsuits. We signed up a lot of cases today.  Some have been procrastinating, some are worried about losing benefits (please call and talk to us if that is the case), and some just do not watch television and see the endless commercials.

If you have a case and have been hesitant to come forward, now is truly your last chance. Unfortunately, I’m sure we will still receive strong cases after the deadline, but we won’t be able to help. It doesn’t hurt to inquire, and you can easily do so by filling out an online contact form.

This late in the game, we are only taking these cases:

I can’t emphasize enough that this is your last chance.

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 Lejuene 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 28, 2024 – Status Conference

The next status conference will be on July 16th. At the moment, his litigation focus has shifted toward preparing the individual bellwether case for trial.

June 27, 2024 – Time Is Running Out

Our law firm is now getting more calls from prospective Camp Lejeune water contamination victims than we have since this litigation started. We are still signing up new cases. But the deadline is near.  One thing is for sure: we will get calls on great claims before August 10th, but there will not be enough time to prepare to file before the deadline.

If you have a potential claim you want to bring or are hesitant because you are unsure if you have a case, call today at 800-553-8082 or get a free online consultation.

June 22, 2024 – Case Count

According to the most recently filed joint status report, 1,825 Camp Lejeune civil lawsuits have been filed under the CLJA. 21 of those lawsuits were voluntarily dismissed by the plaintiffs, and 4 more were cases filed without an attorney that were dismissed for procedural failures. 261,293 administrative claims have been filed with the Navy under the CLJA.

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 15, 2024 – Status Conference

This week, there was a status conference at which some agreements were forged, at least for now, on four of the outstanding discovery motions.

The next status conference is on June 27th.

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.

June 7, 2024 – Lawsuit and Claim Count

A total of 1,813 Camp Lejeune Justice Act (CLJA) lawsuits have been filed. There are approximately 232,892 administrative claims filed with the Department of Navy.

June 6, 2024 – Plaintiffs’ Lose Causation Motion

As we discussed in our update on January 16, 2024, lawyers for Camp Lejeune victims moved for partial summary judgment on the issue of causation. Plaintiffs also moved for leave to file the Motion without an accompanying Statement of Material Facts.

Yesterday, the court denied the plaintiffs’ motion. The court determined that individuals bringing Camp Lejeune lawsuits bear the burden of demonstrating that their harm was caused by exposure to the water at Camp Lejeune, requiring them to establish general and specific causation.

Plaintiffs had argued that the CLJA’s causation standard departs from common-law tort requirements, asserting that claimants need not prove specific causation if they meet the statutory 30-day exposure requirement. They claimed that the CLJA establishes a distinct causation framework, similar to the VA’s presumption-based system for benefits.

The court sees it differently than the plaintiffs, which is becoming a trend of late.

May 31, 2024 – Dr. Portier

Last week, we reported on the government’s attempt to quash the deposition of Dr. Christopher Portier, the ATSDR Director during these studies, who oversaw and was involved in the water modeling and health studies for Camp Lejeune. The government’s motion for a protective order aims to prevent the deposition, claiming Dr. Portier’s involvement was minimal and bemoaning the costs of a deposition in Italy.

Yesterday, plaintiffs’ lawyers filed a response. Their motion argues that the government seeks to disavow the ATSDR’s findings, instead embracing a critical report by the National Research Council (NRC), a private entity. Dr. Portier had defended the ATSDR’s studies, highlighting errors in the NRC’s report. The motion argues that the government’s motion lacks specific factual support and that Dr. Portier’s deposition is essential to effectively challenge the NRC report’s criticisms.

Attorneys for victims also assert that Dr. Portier has willingly volunteered to testify, and they will cover the costs of ensuring the deposition is conducted in compliance with international laws. The government’s main concern appears to be the expenses involved, which the motion argues, as I did last week, are negligible compared to the context of this litigation.

May 28, 2024 – New Bill

A new bill in Congress proposes removing the restriction that cases must be filed exclusively in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina. This change would permit it to be heard in any district court within the Fourth Circuit for trial.

First impression: this would cause chaos that would not help anybody. These four judges who make the law governing the claims create a real organization for the litigation. I don’t always like the rulings (the jury trial ruling in particular), but this structure helps advance the litigation.

May 26, 2024 – Time Remaining to Bring a Camp Lejeune Lawsuit

It takes longer to complete the puzzle of filing a Camp Lejeune suit or administrative claim, particularly in wrongful death cases. So if you are still considering making a claim, the August 10, 2024 deadline is pretty much on top of us. There will come a point soon – our lawyers have not figured out exactly what that date will be for us – when Camp Lejeune attorneys stop taking new cases.

If you have a potential case and are unsure if you want to bring it, call a lawyer today. Of course, we would like you to call us, but it is more important that you call any lawyer who knows this litigation to find out what your options are and whether this is something you want to do.

May 24, 2024 – Protective Order for Dr. Christopher Portier

Plaintiffs’ lawyers have noted the deposition of Dr. Christopher Portier, former Director of the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR). The deposition is scheduled for May 28, 2024, in Domodossola, Italy.

In a motion yesterday, the DOJ contends that the cost of conducting the deposition in Italy outweighs any potential benefits. They argue that Dr. Portier had limited direct involvement in the ATSDR’s Camp Lejeune studies and that relevant information is already being gathered through the scheduled depositions of two key ATSDR scientists, Dr. Frank Bove and Morris Maslia, who had more direct involvement.

I try to be mostly neutral in these updates. But give me a break. The government is going to pay tens of billions of dollars in settlements. Given the stakes of this litigation, is a trip to Italy really so inconvenient and costly?   (Do you really think DOJ lawyers are not already making jokes about who gets to go on that trip? They could also do a video deposition, of course, especially if the witness is as unimportant as they say.)

Dr. Portier’s testimony could be extremely important. His critical review of the National Research Council’s report on Camp Lejeune highlighted deficiencies and provided a more nuanced understanding of the potential health impacts. He has also previously evaluated studies and reports concerning Camp Lejeune’s water contamination.

Moreover, while Dr. Portier may not have had direct involvement in every study, his role as Director means he was privy to strategic decisions and scientific interpretations that shaped ATSDR’s response to the Camp Lejeune situation. His testimony can illuminate ATSDR’s stance on the health risks posed by the contaminants and any internal deliberations that informed their public statements and reports.

May 16, 2024 – Discovery Battles

The lawyers had a conference with the magistrate judge today to discuss the various discovery battles between the parties.

May 15, 2024 –  People Trying to Represent Themselves

At this point, most of the new clients we are getting are victims who tried to do it themselves and are realizing it will be much harder than they thought. If this describes you, give us a call.

May 14, 2024 – Court Orders ATSDR to Produce Files

Yesterday, the court partially granted the plaintiffs’ motion to require the ATSDR to produce certain specialized files in their original format. However, the request for a complete “mirror image” of all the water modeling project files was denied.

The ruling involves two types of files: the “Exotic Modeling Files,” which include complex data like Geographic Information System files, and a broader set of standard electronic files such as PDFs and Word documents, referred to as “Non-Exotic Files.” While the court ordered that all Exotic Modeling Files be produced in their native format according to the production specifications, it rejected the idea of producing a mirror image of all modeling files, limiting the scope of document production.

The plaintiffs have expressed difficulties in verifying the accuracy of their reconstructed model without the complete files as maintained by the ATSDR. They argue that without the mirror image, they cannot confirm if their reconstructed project file accurately represents the original. The court seems to understand there may be a problem. It has scheduled an in-camera presentation by the plaintiffs to demonstrate further the specific problems they are facing with the file functionality. So everyone can sit down and figure out what is needed.

May 13, 2024 – New Awful Decision on Jury Trial Appeal

In a surprising decision this morning, the North Carolina Camp Lejeune judges denied a motion seeking immediate appellate review of a previous ruling that struck down the plaintiffs’ demand for a jury trial.

This decision came after the United States successfully argued for the removal of the jury trial option, a move that just two plaintiffs contested. The thinking was that the cases could move forward, but these plaintiffs would appeal the decision, which would, if reversed, ultimately apply to the remaining plaintiffs. It seemed like the best past to keep these cases moving and give victims a chance to adequately challenge and rectify what we think is a misapplication of the law concerning their right to a jury trial under the CLJA.

The government says that the “latest statistics bear out the effectiveness of the [Elective Option] program.”

This is a pretty crazy assertion. The Elective Option for settlement was announced seven months ago. We only have $9 million in settlements. Only 36 cases have been settled. The settlement program is inadequate in terms of the amount offered and has made little progress in extending offers to the many thousands of claimants eligible for settlement.

The delays have been attributed to the government’s inability to efficiently access and verify records held by other federal agencies, particularly the VA. Initial plans to develop a technical solution for bulk eligibility verification were abandoned, and the government resorted to a slow, manual search process for each claimant. How is that going to work for 227,309 claims? This is the pace at which this litigation will be resolved in thousands of years.

May 11, 2024 – Government Alleges Lawyers Not Conveying Offers

The government alleges that in some cases, plaintiffs’ lawyers have not promptly communicated Camp Lejeune settlement offers, or the victims were not informed about the deadlines for these offers. It says it is now proactively reminding plaintiffs’ counsel about pending Elective Option offers and their upcoming expiration dates.

The government also says it has considered reasonable requests to revisit settlement offers and, in specific situations, has increased the amounts of these offers based on new evidence provided.

May 10, 2024 – Update Case Count

The latest case count is 1,764 lawsuits. The number of administrative claims has jumped to 227,309. So there are not many new lawsuits, but the number of claims filed with the Navy has soared.

May 9, 2024 – Muster Rolls Dispute

The government says the muster rolls dispute we discussed in the May 5^th update below is a misunderstanding. It maintains that all relevant data and databases have been provided, specifically from a Network Attached Storage (NAS) device at Quantico, which holds the records in question.

The DOJ explains that this database has been variously named over the years, but the U.S. clarifies that the different names refer to the same database. What about the PowerPort slide victims’ lawyer found suggesting the existence of a separate “MUDD database?”  The government says this is just another name for the already produced data.

May 6, 2024 – 2nd Motion to Compel

Yesterday, we wrote about a motion to compel the digitized muster rolls that have been the subject of great debate. A second motion to compel was filed Friday on the ATSDR Water Modeling Project Files, another issue that has long been a source of contention.

The plaintiffs’ attorneys initially sought these files to ensure the integrity of geographic information system (GIS) files and water modeling files, collectively termed “Exotic Modeling Files,” which they claimed could be compromised by the standard electronic stored information (ESI) processing protocols. The government had countered that while some data within these files could be altered by ESI processing, they would produce the exotic files natively as per protocol requirements.

Following the court’s order, the defendant produced databases that included native versions of the exotic files. However, the plaintiffs’ lawyers argue that despite these productions, uncertainty remains about the completeness and accuracy of the data reconstruction. They assert that without a mirror image of the original project file, there is no reliable way to confirm whether all data points and links within the model are intact and correctly placed.

The ATSDR’s water modeling files are a big deal in this litigation. So plaintiffs’ attorneys are urging the court to reconsider its previous ruling. They request the court to compel the government to produce a clone or mirror copy of the ATSDR’s water modeling project file in its native format, alongside any other appropriate relief so that plaintiffs can get the necessary information. Unless the government concedes that every square inch of this base had these awful chemicals, plaintiffs need to know every detail about the water movement on the base.

May 5, 2024 – Motion to Compel by Plaintiffs

On Friday, plaintiffs’ lawyers asked the court to reconsider an earlier order that denied their Motion to Compel the production of certain digitized muster rolls related to the Marine Corps and the Department of Veterans Affairs’ Camp Lejeune project.

We discuss this in our February 7, 2024 update below. Initially, the defendant opposed the plaintiffs’ Motion to Compel because it no longer mattered—they had already committed to producing the digitized muster rolls by the end of March 2024. They also mentioned that the muster rolls were not searchable by name as the plaintiffs had expected, nor was there an expectation for a future database to allow name-based searches without multiple selections or searches.

However, the plaintiffs’ attorneys offer new evidence suggesting the existence of a Marine Corps Unit Diary Database (MUDD) covering the years 1940-2005, which appears to fulfill the specific requests made in their initial motion. This database was revealed in an undated VA presentation victims’ lawyers found, highlighting its capabilities to be searched by year, description, or through a full-text search—a tool that was specifically developed to facilitate queries from 1950-1990, the exact period relevant to this litigation.

The paradox is that victims are struggling to get their service records from the party that is the defendant in this litigation. So plaintiffs are asking for the court’s help in forcing the government to turn over what it has so plaintiffs can prove they were at Lejeune.

April 26, 2024 – Plaintiffs’ Track 3 Proposal

The attorneys representing the plaintiffs in the Camp Lejeune case have submitted a formal proposal to consider serious illnesses in Track 5.

The proposed diseases are

1. multiple myeloma
2. pancreatic cancer
3. esophageal cancer
4. aplastic anemia/myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS)
5. scleroderma.

The history of this is late last year, the plaintiffs’ Camp Lejeune lawyers proposed liver cancer, sclerosis/scleroderma, multiple myeloma, kidney disease, and aplastic anemia for Track 3. They also suggested that the illnesses submitted by the government for Track 2 be considered for Track 3.

In a separate filing on the same day, the government recommended that the court select any of the five diseases not chosen from the U.S. proposed diseases for Track 2, including prostate cancer, breast cancer, lung cancer, pancreatic cancer, and esophageal cancer. The court designated the illnesses for Track 2.

With the diseases selected for Track 2 removed from both submissions, the remaining conditions for consideration are pancreatic cancer, esophageal cancer, sclerosis/scleroderma, multiple myeloma, and aplastic anemia, which the plaintiffs’ Camp Lejeune attorneys have nominated for Track 5.

There is understandable frustration from victims with illnesses that will not be included in the first three tracks. How are the diseases being selected? The reasons stated by both sides are the disease’s severity and the probable number of affected cases. The unstated reason is that both sides want to push forward cases they can win, which will have higher verdicts (or, from the government’s perspective, lower verdicts). That is why the government is pushing cases like “dental effects” and hypersensitivity skin disorders. They do not even represent the plaintiffs’ primary health concerns and, in many cases, such as dental effects, may be secondary to cancer treatments.

April 22, 2024 – Settlement Master

Camp Lejeune attorneys on both sides are interviewing candidates to suggest as potential Settlement Masters to help them find a path to a more reasonable global settlement plan. Names will be provided to the court by Friday.

April 21, 2024 – Number of Outstanding Claims

There have been 1,740 lawsuits filed under the Camp Lejeune Justice Act (CLJA). Among these, 25 cases have been dismissed, with 21 being voluntary dismissals and the remaining four being pro se cases. Over 16,000 new administrative claims have been filed with the Department of Navy, bringing the number to 190,561. There have been 40 Camp Lejeune settlements. So 0.021% of these claims have settled.

April 19, 2024 – Deadline to Respond to Records Motion

Today is the deadline for plaintiffs’ lawyers to respond to the motion discussed on April 12th below.

The Lejeune litigation docket has been slow this week. Again, Camp Lejeune attorneys are really focused on getting individual lawsuits ready for trial. That requires fewer global issue motions and more in-the-weeds discovery.

April 18, 2024 – Evidence Protocol

Plaintiffs’ Camp Lejeune attorneys asked the court yesterday to establish a protocol for storing individual plaintiffs’ evidence related to Camp Lejeune lawsuits.

This depository is needed because this litigation involves events spanning over seventy years, and relevant evidence includes tangible items, records, and documents existing or stored across various physical and virtual media, both old and new. In 2024, most of this is just stored electronically. But converting other documents and evidence currently in tangible form may be infeasible or unduly costly and time-consuming.

This is a good idea that the government does not oppose.

April 17, 2024 – Opt-Out Dispute

The government has filed a motion requesting reconsidering an order that declined to strike the opt-out provision from future discovery tracks in the Camp Lejeune water litigation.

The government’s motion argues that attorneys for Camp Lejeune water contamination victims are exploiting the opt-out provision to significantly limit the number of plaintiffs available for discovery and trial, thus compromising the representativeness of the bellwether cases. The motion highlights that lawyers have opted out a substantial portion of eligible cases from Track 2, contrary to their initial assurance that they did not foresee the need for such opt-outs in future tracks.

This concern is not uncommon. It is a leitmotif in many MDLs. But it is too late to complain now, and it is important to balance the need for a perfectly representative pool—an impossible goal, anyway—with fairness to real people.

April 12, 2024 – Discovery Dispute

Plaintiffs have served document requests on the government. The DOJ has asked the court for a blanket extension to respond. The plaintiffs’ lawyers have said no because we do not want further delay. The DOJ has filed a motion; victims’ lawyers have until next Friday to respond. If history is an indication, it will not take that long.

April 8, 2024 – Single Disease Plaintiffs

Today, the government filed a motion asking the court to allow bellwether trials that only focus on diseases already recognized as associated with the Camp Lejeune water (“single disease plaintiffs”).

The government argues that cases where plaintiffs claim multiple diseases or conditions not yet recognized as being associated with the water are inherently complex and require extensive medical and scientific evidence. Therefore, the government suggests these complex cases should be tried later.

So the government is asking for a new deadline for identifying which plaintiffs fall into each category, and the time for discovering expert evidence will be extended for the multiple-disease Plaintiffs.

I understand the government’s point here. There are two problems. First, it is late in the game to ask for this. Second, some of the most tragic cases involve multiple-disease plaintiffs. How is it fair to take them out of the pool?

The government also wants to live in a fantasy world where only the illnesses it thinks are related to the contaminated water at Camp Lejeune will be compensable. The sooner it is divorced from this notion, the better.

April 4, 2024 – Call Your Camp Lejeune Attorney

Some Camp Lejeune victims have hired multiple lawyers for the same claim. I have no idea why people do this, but it happens in every significant piece of litigation our attorneys see.

If you have done this, come clean and tell your lawyers now. Why? It may slow up the processing of any settlement offer you may receive.

April 2, 2024 – Status

Today’s status conference focused mostly on discovery issues. The next conference is on April 26, 2024.

March 27, 2024 – Claims Number and Settlement Statistics

As of yesterday, 1,662 suits had been filed under the Camp Lejeune Justice Act, and approximately 176,662 administrative claims had been filed with the Navy.

As for Camp Lejeune settlements, there are not many when you look at these numbers. The Torts Branch has identified 51 cases in litigation that qualify for the Elective Option. The breakdown of cases by injury includes 14 cases of bladder cancer, 12 of kidney cancer, 10 non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma, five of kidney disease, four of Parkinson’s disease, four of leukemia, and two of multiple myeloma.

Twenty-one offers have been accepted by plaintiffs, including five cases of bladder cancer with settlements of $150,000, $150,000, $300,000, $300,000, and $450,000; four cases of kidney disease (end-stage renal disease) with settlements of $250,000, $250,000, $100,000, and $100,000; five cases of kidney cancer with settlements of $300,000, $300,000, $300,000, $300,000, and $150,000; three cases of non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma with settlements of $150,000, $150,000, and $300,000; one case of multiple myeloma with a settlement of $250,000; two cases of Parkinson’s disease with settlements of $400,000 and $100,000; and one case of leukemia with a settlement of $300,000. Nine offers were rejected by plaintiffs, including cases of bladder cancer, kidney cancer, multiple myeloma, kidney disease, and Parkinson’s disease. Fifteen offers have expired, including cases of kidney cancer, non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma, bladder cancer, and leukemia. Six offers are pending.

Furthermore, the DOJ is also settling cases separate from the Torts Branch. Based on information provided by the Navy, it has approved offers for 59 claimants. Twenty-four settlement offers have been accepted, two have been rejected, 25 have expired, and eight are pending.

Payments have been sent for eight accepted settlement offers made by the Navy and eighteen accepted settlement offers from the DOJ, totaling $5,950,000. Six cases of bladder cancer resulted in two payments of $300,000, three payments of $150,000, and one payment of $450,000. Four cases of leukemia resulted in three payments of $300,000 and one payment of $150,000. Three cases of non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma resulted in one payment of $300,000 and two payments of $150,000. Three cases of Parkinson’s disease resulted in one payment of $400,000, one payment of $250,000, and one payment of $100,000. Five cases of kidney cancer resulted in four payments of $300,000 and one payment of $150,000. Three cases of kidney disease resulted in two payments of $100,000 and one payment of $250,000. One case of multiple myeloma resulted in a payment of $250,000.

All told, payments totaling $5,950,000 have been made for eight settlements offered by the Navy and eighteen by the DOJ, covering various conditions like bladder cancer, leukemia, non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma, Parkinson’s disease, kidney cancer, kidney disease, and multiple myeloma, with amounts varying from $100,000 to $450,000.

Victims are understandably frustrated by the pace of the process. This is not what Congress intended.

March 25, 2024 – Updates

There was a status conference last week that went over the discovery disputes we have been talking about. The next conference is on April 2, 2024, which is a telephonic status hearing.

Many of you are coming here for regular updates and are not getting much information of late. We are not asleep at the wheel. The energy in the litigation right now is in getting cases ready for trial with pretrial discovery, which does not lend itself to as many updates. We give these boring “there is a status conference” updates sometimes, not so much that we think you care about the next status conference, but to remind you, we are putting all the relevant news our lawyers have.

We will keep you posted. In the meantime, you can share any questions or thoughts you have in the comments section below.

March 14, 2024 – Camp Lejeune Settlement Payouts So Far

There are two entities within the government making settlement offers: the Torts Branch and the DOJ.

The Torts Branch confirmed that 50 cases in litigation qualify for the Elective Option (EO) based on document verification. These cases are categorized by injury as follows:

• 14 for Bladder Cancer
• 12 for Kidney Cancer
• 10 for non-Hodgkin’s Lymphoma
• 5 for Kidney Disease
• 4 for Parkinson’s Disease
• 3 for Leukemia
• 2 for Multiple Myeloma

Settlement offers have been extended, with 18 accepted across various conditions, including $150,000 to $450,000 for Bladder Cancer, $100,000 to $250,000 for Kidney Disease (End Stage Renal Disease), $150,000 to $300,000 for Kidney Cancer, $150,000 for non-Hodgkin’s Lymphoma, $250,000 for Multiple Myeloma, and $100,000 to $400,000 for Parkinson’s Disease. Nine offers were declined, and ten have expired across different diagnoses. Currently, 13 settlement offers are still pending.

Additionally, the DOJ has made settlement offers to 59 claimants based on Navy-provided information, with 24 being accepted, two rejected, 25 expired, and eight pending. Payments totaling $3.6 million have been disbursed for eight settlements from the Navy and seven from the DOJ, covering various conditions such as Bladder Cancer, Leukemia, non-Hodgkin’s Lymphoma, Parkinson’s Disease, Kidney Cancer, and Kidney Disease, with amounts ranging from $100,000 to $400,000.

Is it too soon to call the Elective Option an utter failure? No. They have only settled a fraction of a fraction of these lawsuits. There needs to be a better plan. The parties are actively developing a questionnaire and a roadmap to facilitate a resolution. They also jointly proposed bringing on a lawyer to act as the Special Settlement Master. There is a growing recognition that settlement efforts have to move forward more quickly.

March 13, 2024:  Case Count

We are now up to 1,633 Camp Lejeune lawsuits and 174,891 administrative claims.

March 11, 2024 – Status Conference

The court announced today the next status conference will be on March 19, 2024, at 11:00 a.m. in Wilmington.

March 8, 2024 – Moving Forward on Track 2 Discovery

Plaintiffs’ lawyers want to push the ball forward on Track 2 cases. Again, Track 2 cases are:

1. Prostate Cancer
2. Liver Cancer
3. Lung Cancer
4. Breast Cancer
5. Kidney Disease

Plaintiffs want the court to remove the stay on cases within the Track 2 Discovery Pool and, upon selection of the Track 2 discovery plaintiffs, allow fact discovery for each plaintiff’s lawsuit to begin.

Of course, the government wants to delay. It proposes waiting to lift the stay on fact discovery for Track 2 illnesses after selecting Track 1 bellwether trial cases.

March 5, 2024 – Pretrial Discovery Rules Established

Both sides have agreed to specific rules to make the pretrial discovery more efficient in the Camp Lejeune water contamination litigation. This agreement, approved by the court in new Case Management Order #11, includes several key points:

• To manage the large number of cases efficiently, the agreement allows the government the chance to conduct independent medical exams on plaintiffs who have been examined by a medical expert to give testimony, hired by the plaintiffs’ lawyers. This right to what our lawyers call a “defense medical exam” is a right that defendants have in personal injury cases. But for the sake of speeding up the process, the government will skip its own medical exams of a plaintiff if that plaintiff agrees not to use their own exams for expert testimony in court.
• The plaintiffs’ attorneys have agreed to give early notice to the United States about any medical exams they plan for their clients by experts who will testify in court. This is to prevent the United States from having to request many defense expert exams that might not be needed, which always slows things down.
• The plaintiffs must inform the Navy as soon as they are sure that an expert who has examined a plaintiff will testify on behalf of that plaintiff. If they already know the expert will testify, this notice must be given before the medical exam. If an expert initially considered a consulting (non-testifying) expert is later decided to be a testifying expert, the plaintiffs’ attorneys must promptly notify the United States.
• This agreement does not cover ongoing treatments by plaintiffs’ regular healthcare providers or consultations with non-testifying expert witnesses.
• The agreement applies to any physical or mental examination under the legal rules, whether ordered by the court or not, except for expert meetings with a plaintiff that do not involve such examinations.

This stipulation is designed to streamline the handling of numerous lawsuits by reducing the number of medical exams and expert testimonies. This makes the legal process more efficient for both parties and helps us get more cases to trial faster.

February 28, 2024 – Camp Lejeune Settlement News

This is the latest government report on Camp Lejeune settlements:

As of February 27, 2024, the Torts Branch has identified that forty-eight (48) cases in litigation satisfy the Elective Option (“EO”) criteria, as confirmed through documentary evidence.

The distribution of these cases by type of injury is as follows: 13 instances of Bladder Cancer, 12 of Kidney Cancer, 10 of non-Hodgkin’s Lymphoma, 5 of Kidney Disease, 3 of Parkinson’s Disease, 3 of Leukemia, and 2 of Multiple Myeloma.

In terms of settlement offers, seventeen (17) have been accepted by plaintiffs, including 5 cases of Bladder Cancer with settlements totaling $150,000, $150,000, $300,000, $300,000, and $450,000; 3 cases of Kidney Disease (End Stage Renal Disease) with settlements of $250,000, $100,000, and $100,000; 5 cases of Kidney Cancer with settlements totaling $300,000, $300,000, $300,000, $300,000, and $150,000; 2 cases of non-Hodgkin’s Lymphoma with settlements of $150,000 each; 1 case of Multiple Myeloma with a settlement of $250,000; and 1 case of Parkinson’s Disease with a settlement of $400,000

Additionally, seven (7) offers were rejected by plaintiffs, encompassing four cases of Bladder Cancer, one case of Kidney Cancer, one case of Multiple Myeloma, and one case of Kidney Disease. Eight (8) offers have expired, involving three cases of Kidney Cancer, two cases of non-Hodgkin’s Lymphoma, two cases of Bladder Cancer, and one case of Leukemia. Sixteen (16) other settlement offers are currently pending.

Furthermore, the DOJ has endorsed offers for fifty-eight (58) claimants based on information provided by the Navy, with twenty-four (24) of these offers being accepted, two (2) rejected, twenty-five (25) expired, and seven (7) still pending. Payments have been issued for eight accepted settlement offers from the Navy and seven accepted offers from the DOJ, amounting to a total of $3,600,000.

This total includes payments for five cases of Bladder Cancer (two payments of $300,000 and three of $150,000), four cases of Leukemia (three payments of $300,000 and one of $150,000), two cases of non-Hodgkin’s Lymphoma (one payment of $300,000 and one of $150,000), two cases of Parkinson’s Disease (one payment of $400,000 and one of $250,000), one case of Kidney Cancer (a payment of $300,000), and one case of Kidney Disease (a payment of $100,000).

It is time we pronounce the Elective Option plan dead on arrival. We have 170,000 claims.

I think the government now understands this and is looking at different paths to settlement. Certainly, the judges will do everything they can to help push this ball forward. The last thing the court wants is 170,000 lawsuits filed in their district in the next six months.

February 27, 2024 – Updated Statistics

Currently, 1,530 Camp Lejeune lawsuits have been filed under the Camp Lejeune Justice Act. Among these, fifteen cases have been dismissed, with twelve being voluntary dismissals and the remaining three being pro se cases. The lawsuits are pretty evenly distributed by the four judges in the Eastern District of North Carolina.

There are approximately 170,502 administrative claims currently on file with the Navy.

February 26, 2024 – Track 2 Diseases Are Set

There has been a lot of speculation over which cancers/diseases would be included in Track 2. We now have the answer:

1. Prostate Cancer
2. Liver Cancer
3. Lung Cancer
4. Breast Cancer
5. Kidney Disease

We estimate these five conditions make up about 25% of the Camp Lejeune claims that have been made.

The court is quick to point out that the choice of specific cases for early trial is not based on a determination of how strong these claims are one way or the other. Instead, the judges say this selection aims at identifying diseases that, if addressed early in trial settings, could facilitate the settlement of frequently occurring illnesses. The hope is for early settlements or verdicts for certain groups of illnesses, providing quicker resolutions for victims, a goal the judges do seem to have firmly in mind.

The parties are directed to present a discovery plan proposal for the illnesses categorized under Track 2, either together or separately, within ten days following this order.

February 14, 2024 – Jury Trials