In re Teflon Products Liability Litigation
United States District Court for the Southern District of Iowa
254 F.R.D. 354 (2008)
- Written by DeAnna Swearingen, LLM
Facts
Numerous individuals (plaintiffs) claimed that DuPont (defendant) falsely misrepresented that its Teflon® nonstick coating was safe, when in fact normal use can cause a flu-like illness. The action sought recovery for economic losses and injunctive relief. The causes of action varied by state but included negligent misrepresentation, statutory violations, and others. In a multidistrict litigation proceeding, the plaintiffs asked the court to certify 23 classes of consumers who used Teflon® coated products. The plaintiffs proposed three sub-classes: (1) those who bought branded Teflon® coated products and had documentation, (2) those who bought off-brand DuPont coated products, and (3) those who did not fit into the other classes. After extensive discovery, it became clear that very few potential plaintiffs, including the proposed class representatives, had any documentation or memory about when or where they purchased the products at issue, and it would be impossible to determine whether a product was coated with Teflon® by a visual inspection. DuPont opposed certification of the class.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Longstaff, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 810,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.
