Camp Lejeune Class Action Lawsuit Filed on Behalf of All Individuals Injured by Contaminated Marine Base Water

Class action lawsuit seeks to pursue damages for cancer and other injuries caused by contaminated Camp Lejeune water among individuals whose claim is denied, do not retain a lawyer and file their own individual lawsuit

A class action lawsuit has been brought against the U.S. government, seeking damages on behalf individuals injured by contaminated Camp Lejeune water, following exposure at the Marine base for at least 30 days between August 1, 1953 and December 31, 1987.

The complaint (PDF) was filed by Donald Stringfellow in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina on August 14, only a few days after President Biden signed a new law that allows veterans, family members and other individuals to pursue claims for cancer, Parkinson’s disease and other ailments linked to toxins in the water at Camp Lejeune decades ago.

Tens of thousands of Camp Lejeune water lawsuits are expected to be filed over the coming months, pursuing damages and benefits now available under the Camp Lejeune Justice Act of 2022, which opened a two year window for individuals to pursue claims that were previously barred by the North Carolina statute of limitations.

Learn More About

Camp Lejeune Lawsuits

Water contamination at Camp Lejeune in North Carolina between 1953 and 1987 caused cancers, birth defects, miscarriages and other side effects for U.S. Marines and their family members.

Learn More About this Lawsuit See if you Qualify for a Settlement

Some estimates indicate more than a million Marines and their family members suffered exposure to contaminated Camp Lejeune water between the early 1950s and late 1980s, with some estimates suggesting that toxic chemicals from Camp Lejeune may be responsible for more than 50,000 cases of breast cancer, 28,000 cases of bladder cancer, and 24,000 cases of renal cancer, as well as thousands of cases involve Parkinson’s disease, birth defects and other health complications.

While most of the cases that will be filed under the new law involve individual injury claims, Stringfellow is pursuing certification of his complaint as a Camp Lejeune class action lawsuit to protect the statutory rights, opportunities and benefits accorded under the new law, by preserving the timeliness of their claims. In addition, the complaint indicates that the class action over Camp Lejeune water contamination will provide the Court with certain procedural and case management tools for “the just, speedy and inexpensive determination” of the claims.

The lawsuit seeks to include as class members all individuals who resided, worked or were otherwise exposed to Camp Lejeune water, including unborn children exposed in utero, for at least 30 days between August 1, 1953 and December 31, 1987, who have filed a claim in the administrative process established for cases against the U.S. government, which was denied or not acted on within six months. In addition, class members will be limited to individuals who are not otherwise represented by an individual Camp Lejeune water contamination lawyer, and have not filed their own lawsuit under the Act as of the date class certification is granted.

Stringfellow indicates that while he was on base, he was exposed to contaminated water which contained chemicals including trichlorethylene (TCE), perchloroethylene (PCE), vinyl chloride and benzene. As a result of the contaminated Camp Lejeune water, Stringfellow indicates that he was later diagnosed with serious illnesses, which are attributed to these chemicals.

In anticipation of this new law, Camp Lejeune toxic water lawyers have been investigating potential claims for months, and gathering evidence about specific injuries that can be linked to chemicals found on the base, including various cancers, lymphoma, Parkinson’s disease, kidney damage, birth defects, fertility problems and other conditions.

Some estimates suggest that more than 300,000 Camp Lejeune cancer lawsuits and other injury claims may ultimately be brought by Marine veterans, surviving family members and others exposed to the contaminated water.

7 Comments

  • JUSTODecember 18, 2022 at 6:16 pm

    Not one of these lawyers sending messages to me are stating the truth of the amount of the settlement. from a little over 2,000.00 to 59,000.00 so, I did My own research and I qualify under Tier 2 colon cancer after I was honorably discharged in 1975. I became I'll and it was colon cancer in 1978. Why are lawyers Placing their greed on this settlement to deprive and denied Veterans their servi[Show More]Not one of these lawyers sending messages to me are stating the truth of the amount of the settlement. from a little over 2,000.00 to 59,000.00 so, I did My own research and I qualify under Tier 2 colon cancer after I was honorably discharged in 1975. I became I'll and it was colon cancer in 1978. Why are lawyers Placing their greed on this settlement to deprive and denied Veterans their service for this Nation, for these advocates to enrich themselves based on the pain, suffering and death of those Who had the courage to join the Armed Forces of the United States this is the question I would like to Present to the presiding justice in The Eastern District of North Carolina.

  • KevinNovember 10, 2022 at 12:00 am

    no

  • DoraNovember 7, 2022 at 9:41 pm

    no

  • JohnNovember 6, 2022 at 8:40 pm

    no

  • EddieNovember 3, 2022 at 10:40 pm

    Military vertrian camp lejeune hearing lose

  • cindyOctober 7, 2022 at 3:59 am

    ENOUGH with Camp Lejeune!!!! - Not one person in DC or Lawyer has took up the cause of the soldiers - personal that served at Fort Fort McClellan… My husband served there- and he received a letter in mail stating for him to be checked regularly due his exposure . That’s it - a cold heartless letter! They closed the base and bought off the town! Really! Enough with Lejeune commercials![Show More]ENOUGH with Camp Lejeune!!!! - Not one person in DC or Lawyer has took up the cause of the soldiers - personal that served at Fort Fort McClellan… My husband served there- and he received a letter in mail stating for him to be checked regularly due his exposure . That’s it - a cold heartless letter! They closed the base and bought off the town! Really! Enough with Lejeune commercials!!! READ THIS!!! Recently the Veterans Administration has established a page under the heading "Potential Exposure at Fort McClellan - Public Health" That page in part, states the following: "Some members of the U.S. Army Chemical Corp School, Army Combat Development Command Chemical/Biological/Radiological Agency, Army Military Police School and Women's Army Corps, among others, may have been exposed to one or more of several hazardous materials, likely at low levels, during their service at Fort McClellan". In 2016, a group of former service veterans from Fort McClellan compiled original environmental engineering sources papers that strongly indicates that the Fort was a former remote test location for the Chemical Weapons experiments program out of Edgewood, Maryland and the former Biowarfare Germ Program out of Fort Detrick, Maryland. The veterans are currently working towards obtaining a new GAO Office report on the spill sites at the base, to confirm whether or not it was a part of the infamous PROJECT 112 battery of military experiments that started up in the 1960s. Fort McClellan was also the site of open air burn pits that were used in staging the CBRNE tests around the base until 1975. Potential exposures could have included, but are not limited to, the following: Radioactive compounds (cesium-137 and cobalt-60) used in decontamination training activities in isolated locations on base; Chemical warfare agents (mustard gas and nerve agents) used in secret military experiments and CBRNE field tests on the troops without ever warning them; friable indoors asbestos pollution inside the barracks buildings which all required remedial cleanup actions; a (TCE) SuperFund contamination site at the Anniston Army Depot where commuter workforce veterans worked who were living at the barracks at Fort McClellan; and full-face exposures to CS Riot Control gas for military qualifying classes. There was also a regional-sized PCB contamination zone from 1950 to 1998 stemming from a Monsanto Factory in the neighboring town where Fort McClellan soldiers had to use public travel stations, and a retail district that soldiers used for their off-duty hours. There was also a total of three landfills which were found to be toxic and leaching which required remedial cleanup actions. Fort Detrick had also used the site for spraying germ warfare bacteria spores around the base without ever coordinating with other service units. The McClellan Vets group points to this Bacillus spraying as a direct match to the other CBRNE test sites that included PROJECT SHAD. To date, there are a total of ten significant environmental spill sites that have been identified by the medical patient group of the Fort McClellan service veterans. The veterans argue that the sciences for toxicity have changed over the years, and that multiple or mixtures or combinations of low-dose exposures are just as harmful to human health as short bursts of high-dose events.https://www.gao.gov/products/NSIAD-98-228 In 2008, the Environmental Protection Agency issued a final Pathways Report on the aroclor PCB contamination zone caused by a former Monsanto Factory, and the Fort McClellan Veterans are covered by the exposed population declarations in this report under the defined category of "Commercial Visitors". http://www.annistoncag.org/uploadedFiles/Final_Pathways_Analysis_Report%20%20Nov%2008(1).pdf To date, the Dept. of Veterans Affairs has refused to acknowledge or comply with this important toxic exposure declaration. The Dept. of Veterans Affairs has repeatedly refused to do any health studies whatsoever on the Fort McClellan service veterans, and then has tried to use the patient lockout as their reason to not acknowledge that the soldiers are actually a toxic exposure patient group. In 2015 it was discovered that the VA didn't even know how to conduct a national Cumulative Health Risk Assessment on the veterans, and were still holding onto the obsolete patient screening practices of "aggregate" or single-source toxic assessments. The service veterans contend that their illnesses are a medical match to the industry known health risks from each of the ten toxic spill sites that makes up their exposure profile. Clinical lab testing for the veterans is not a viable detection option because they have been away from the original toxic sources at Fort McClellan for a time that exceeds the active Half-Life period for all of the known toxic sources at the base.

  • SherriSeptember 24, 2022 at 9:59 am

    This class action lawsuit is a scam. I know this because I have never been a Marine, nor have any family members, but I get 6 spam mails every day telling me I am part of this fake settlement for being exposed to something I wasn't because I have never set foot on a Marine base. How can I be eligible when there is no way I am qualified and there is no opt out option on any of these scam emails I a[Show More]This class action lawsuit is a scam. I know this because I have never been a Marine, nor have any family members, but I get 6 spam mails every day telling me I am part of this fake settlement for being exposed to something I wasn't because I have never set foot on a Marine base. How can I be eligible when there is no way I am qualified and there is no opt out option on any of these scam emails I am getting? I can't make the stupid people stop and I have no clue how they got my name and email. Don't fall for it. Real Marines are not going to get a penny because *everyone* is getting your penny, whether they deserve it or not. There are few honest people in the world and the attorneys are obviously not checking Marine rosters for their victims.

"*" indicates required fields

Share Your Comments

I authorize the above comments be posted on this page*

Have Your Comments Reviewed by a Lawyer

Provide additional contact information if you want an attorney to review your comments and contact you about a potential case. This information will not be published.

NOTE: Providing information for review by an attorney does not form an attorney-client relationship.

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

More Top Stories