Federal lawsuits claiming firefighter turnout gear caused cancer were consolidated in Minnesota. Turnout gear means the heat-resistant coats, pants and other protective clothing firefighters wear. Bloomberg Law reports the panel issued the transfer order on August 18, 2026 creating MDL No.
3191 in its national consolidation report. The cases cover non-AFFF gear allegedly containing PFAS, often called forever chemicals. Multidistrict litigation, or MDL, sends federal cases to one judge for coordinated discovery and pretrial work.
Table of Contents
- What the Minnesota consolidation does
- Who is suing and who is being sued
- What plaintiffs allege and what testing shows
- What consolidation does not decide for your claim
What the Minnesota consolidation does
AboutLawsuits reports all federal non-AFFF turnout-gear PFAS cases were centralized in the U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota in its consolidation analysis. Centralization covers coordinated discovery and pretrial proceedings. Fire Law Blog reports the MDL was assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey M.
Bryan. The Minnesota MDL was kept separate from MDL No. 2873 in South Carolina. That older MDL covers AFFF firefighting foam. This separation keeps gear claims on a separate pretrial track.
Who is suing and who is being sued
The cases involve three different groups seeking different relief. Individual firefighters bring personal injury claims tied to cancer and disease risk. Reuters reports related Connecticut claims include unions and firefighters seeking medical monitoring.
FOX 9 Minneapolis reports more than 20 companies are named as defendants. Named defendants include 3M, DuPont-related entities, Chemours, Honeywell, Lion, Globe and W.L. Gore as gear or chemical makers.
- individual firefighters alleging cancer or disease from gear exposure
- 13 Connecticut firefighter unions plus 12 firefighters seeking medical monitoring, reported by Reuters
- 28 cities and fire departments seeking gear-replacement costs, reported by FOX 9 Minneapolis
What plaintiffs allege and what testing shows
Reuters reports plaintiffs allege PFAS in turnout gear leaches through skin absorption, ingestion and inhalation in its Connecticut firefighters report. They link that exposure to higher cancer and disease risk for firefighters. The claim focuses on routine wear, storage, heat and handling.
Laboratory testing has documented PFAS in gear textiles. NIST Technical Note 2260 from January 2024 found more than 20 types of PFAS in turnout-gear textiles in the NIST turnout-gear publication. NIST found abrasion, heat and weathering increased measured PFAS concentrations.
What consolidation does not decide for your claim
Consolidation streamlines evidence-gathering and bellwether selection before one Minnesota judge. Bellwethers are selected early trials used to test evidence and valuation. AboutLawsuits reports later individual trials or settlements remain separate if cases are not resolved centrally.
Laboratory results have limits for individual claims. A Data-Not-Drama science review explains NIST stress tests show PFAS presence and concentration changes. Those tests do not prove ordinary gear use caused cancer in any individual firefighter.
You Might Also Like
- Maryland Class Action Advances in Child Car Seat Recall Lawsuit
- Tennessee Receives Settlement Over Meta Teen Social Media Harm
- State Farm settles Louisiana class action over vehicle total loss valuations