Exposure

1. Farmer's Desperation Ignored

No one would help him.

Cattle dying mysteriously. Wilbur Earl Tennant, a West Virginia farmer, watched his cattle suffer grotesque deaths. They wasted away, had tumors, and blackened teeth. He suspected something in Dry Run Creek.

Ignored by authorities. Earl contacted state environmental agencies and DuPont, but felt stonewalled. They wouldn't test the water or visit his farm. He began filming the foamy creek and dead animals himself.

Determined to expose. Feeling dismissed as a "crazy old farmer," Earl resolved to bring the truth to light. His herd dwindled from 300 to half, but his resolve grew stronger.

2. Unexpected Call to Corporate Law

Why was he calling me?

Referred by grandmother. Earl Tennant called corporate defense lawyer Rob Bilott through a family connection. Bilott was surprised, as he defended companies like DuPont, not sued them.

Parkersburg connection. Bilott's grandmother lived near Earl's farm in Parkersburg, his mother's hometown. This personal link made it hard to dismiss Earl's desperate plea.

Agrees to investigate. Despite skepticism about a conspiracy theory against DuPont, Bilott was moved by Earl's passion. He invited Earl to Cincinnati to see his evidence, promising only to look.

3. Discovery of a Hidden Chemical

APFO/PFOA was not 'listed' or 'regulated.'

Initial search fruitless. Bilott's early investigation, including FOIA requests, found no regulated chemicals from DuPont's landfill explaining the problems. DuPont and regulators seemed unconcerned.

Lawsuit forces discovery. Bilott filed a lawsuit to access DuPont's internal files. DuPont resisted requests for plant records, calling them irrelevant to the landfill.

Uncovers PFOA. Persistent digging found a letter mentioning APFO (a form of PFOA), used in Teflon manufacturing. It was unregulated, explaining its absence in prior records.

4. Decades of Corporate Knowledge

DuPont had known eighteen years ago that this 'forever chemical' was contaminating public water and had known the risk it might pose to the public.

Animal studies alarming. Internal documents showed DuPont/3M knew PFOA was toxic since the 1960s. Studies showed effects in rats, dogs, and monkeys (some died).

Human data concerning. Worker studies found elevated PFOA blood levels and liver enzyme changes. A 1981 study found eye defects in 2 of 7 babies born to exposed workers.

Water contamination known. By 1984, DuPont knew PFOA was in Lubeck's public water. They bought the well field but didn't inform the public for over a decade.

5. Exposing the Cover-up Publicly

I felt a duty to try.

Pressure regulators. Bilott wrote a 12-pound letter to state/federal agencies, detailing DuPont's knowledge and PFOA's risks. He threatened citizen suits if they didn't act.

DuPont fights back. DuPont sought a gag order against Bilott (denied by Judge Hill). They accused him of unethical conduct for publicizing the issue.

Documents go public. Bilott's filings and letters put key internal documents into the public record. This attracted media (EWG, 20/20) and pressured EPA.

6. Community Class Action Filed

People had a right to know the full extent of their exposure to this chemical, even if we weren’t yet sure of everything it was doing to them—especially because we weren’t sure of everything it was doing.

Widespread contamination. Bilott learned PFOA was in the public water of communities near the plant, affecting thousands. Joe Kiger's call highlighted community concerns (black teeth, cancers).

Decides to sue. Realizing the problem's scale and regulatory inaction, Bilott decided to file a class action for the community. This was a huge risk for his corporate defense firm.

Leverages new law. He used a recent West Virginia ruling allowing medical monitoring claims for exposure to hazardous substances that increase disease risk, even without current illness.

7. Intense Legal Battles Ensue

DuPont was making both endeavors as complicated, difficult, and time consuming as possible.

DuPont resists fiercely. DuPont fought the class action, seeking venue change (won), dismissal (lost), and stalling discovery. Bilott pushed back, filing motions to compel.

Document destruction. State toxicologist and DuPont toxicologist Gerry Kennedy were found to have destroyed relevant documents. Judge Hill issued an injunction and ordered a negative jury inference.

Wins key rulings. Judge Hill certified the class, denied DuPont's motion to disqualify him, and ordered DuPont to produce internal medical records and lawyer emails (privilege waived).

8. Massive Health Study Funded

Only impartial science could implicate—or exonerate—PFOA.

Settlement reached. A class action settlement provided clean water filtration systems ($10M), $70M cash, and up to $235M for medical monitoring.

Independent Science Panel. A key term was creating a joint-approved, unbiased Science Panel to determine probable links between PFOA and diseases.

C8 Health Project. The $70M cash funded a massive health study (Brookmar, Brooks/Maher) collecting data from ~69,000 class members (paid $400 incentive), providing unprecedented data for the Science Panel.

9. Science Confirms Probable Links

After putting it all together and weighing all the evidence, they had found probable links with six diseases.

Panel analyzes data. The Science Panel spent over seven years analyzing the C8 Health Project data and other studies. This was the largest community health study ever.

Probable links found. In 2011-2012, the panel confirmed probable links between PFOA exposure and six diseases: kidney cancer, testicular cancer, ulcerative colitis, thyroid disease, high cholesterol, and preeclampsia.

Burden of proof met. This independent scientific finding met the legal standard for general causation in the class settlement, confirming PFOA's capability to cause these diseases in the exposed community.

10. Individual Lawsuits Begin

The case was no longer solely about law and science; it was about the human misery caused by five decades of DuPont’s actions and inactions.

Claims triggered. The Science Panel's findings triggered the right for class members with linked diseases to file individual personal injury lawsuits against DuPont.

Thousands file suit. Approximately 3,500 class members, including workers like Ken Wamsley (ulcerative colitis, cancer), filed lawsuits seeking damages.

Cases consolidated. The numerous individual cases were consolidated into a Multi-District Litigation (MDL) in federal court in Ohio under Judge Sargus to manage common issues.

11. DuPont Fights Settlement Terms

DuPont had brought in an entirely new army of lawyers... designed to essentially undo various terms of the original class settlement.

Challenges general causation. Despite the settlement agreement, DuPont argued the Science Panel findings didn't apply to all class members' general causation.

Bilott seeks enforcement. Bilott filed a motion asking Judge Sargus to enforce the settlement term that DuPont would not contest general causation for linked diseases for any class member.

Court upholds agreement. Judge Sargus ruled in Bilott's favor, stating DuPont must abide by the settlement's clear language regarding general causation for all class members.

12. The First Trial Commences

Judgment day had arrived at last.

Bellwether trials. The MDL process selected representative cases for trial. The first was Carla Bartlett, a grandmother with kidney cancer.

Presenting the story. Bilott gave the trial prologue, followed by Papantonio and Douglas detailing DuPont's knowledge, cover-up, and Carla's suffering.

Jury hears evidence. The jury saw internal documents, heard expert testimony, and Carla's personal story. DuPont argued obesity caused her cancer and they lacked knowledge of risks.

Last updated: May 16, 2025