PHILADELPHIA – E.I. du Pont de Nemours and Company has denied allegations that a North Carolina man developed kidney cancer because of his exposure to trichloroethylene, during his work for the company as a materials handler, press operator and tool and dye maker.
Richard Horn of Poplar Branch, N.C. initially filed suit in the Philadelphia County Court of Common Pleas on July 13 versus E.I. du Pont de Nemours and Company of Wilmington, Del., John Doe Individuals 1-5 and ABC Corporations 1-5.
“Plaintiff Richard Horn spent his career from 1979 to 1992 working at DuPont Connector Systems, formerly known as FCI USA, Inc., and prior to that it was Berg Electronics, located at 320 Busser Road in Emigsville, York County, Pennsylvania 17318. Plaintiff held various positions while employed by DuPont, and from 1979 to 1982, Plaintiff worked as a material handler and press operator. From 1982 to 1992, plaintiff, while still employed by DuPont, worked as a tool and die maker. Plaintiff’s daily tasks as a tool and die maker included but were not limited to repairing metal stamping dies and creating inner connectors. While employed by DuPont, and in his role as a tool and die maker, plaintiff was in regular and direct contact with various chemicals including but not limited to trichloroethylene (TCE) that was used to remove oil and clean stamped connectors,” the suit says.
“Plaintiff was exposed to TCE at the DuPont facility. Open drums of liquid TCE were present in his work area and he used it on a regular basis to clean parts and tools as part of his regular job duties, which inevitably caused liquid TCE to come in contact with his skin. Plaintiff was also regularly exposed to fumes from the TCE which became airborne and were inhaled by plaintiff for up to eight hours a day, over a period of years while working for defendant. During his employment, plaintiff was never warned about exposure to TCE or provided any breathing protection or other personal protective equipment (PPE) by defendant.”
The suit adds TCE is a known carcinogen and is highly toxic and hazardous, that prolonged or repeated exposure to TCE causes kidney cancer, non-Hodgkin lymphoma, liver cancer, and other diseases and illnesses and finally, that workers are exposed to TCE primarily by breathing in vapors and through skin contact with vapors and/or liquid.
“At all times material hereto, DuPont represented to plaintiff that the areas and locations where he was working in the aforementioned facility, including the area where he was completing tasks, were safe and plaintiff relied upon DuPont’s representations and/or recommendations. At all times material hereto, DuPont never provided nor required plaintiff to wear a respirator to appropriately guard against exposure to TCE fumes. At all times material hereto, DuPont stored TCE in voluminous, 55-gallon drums throughout the building that were not covered as well as in roughly 50 to 100 open cleaning tanks located in the area of the building’s presses. At all times material hereto, DuPont’s facility where plaintiff worked was not properly ventilated, despite the presence and regular use of open containers of TCE,” the suit states.
“Upon information and belief, it was not until the 1990’s that DuPont removed the TCE from its York County, Pennsylvania facility – years after plaintiff had already experienced regular and direct contact and exposure with TCE, as aforesaid. As a direct and proximate result of defendant’s carelessness and negligence described herein, plaintiff was frequently, continuously and directly exposed to TCE, and was caused to sustain serious and permanent personal injuries, including but not limited to, stage three kidney cancer that was diagnosed on Sept. 13, 2021, and required surgical removal of two kidney tumors. As a further direct and proximate result of defendant’s carelessness and negligence described herein, plaintiff expended and continues to expend various sums of money for medical care and treatment. As a further direct and proximate result of defendant’s carelessness and negligence described herein, plaintiff suffered a loss of earnings necessitated by the diagnosis and treatment of his kidney cancer which required surgery and subsequent recovery and follow-up medical care.”
E.I. du Pont de Nemours and Company removed the case on Aug. 10, due to complete diversity between the plaintiff and itself, and the amount of damages at issue exceeding $75,000.
The company then answered the complaint one week later, on Aug. 17, denied its substantive allegations and provided three affirmative defenses.
“Plaintiff has not alleged facts sufficient to support application of the discovery rule and, therefore, that he has satisfied the applicable two-year statute of limitations. Plaintiff has not alleged facts sufficient to show that he was not contributorily negligent; EIDP therefore asserts the affirmative defense of contributory or comparative negligence and plaintiff’s claim is barred and/or limited by the Pennsylvania Fair Share Act. Plaintiff has not alleged facts sufficient to show that he did not assume the alleged risk of TCE exposure, and EIDP therefore asserts the affirmative defense of assumption of risk,” according to the defenses.
For a lone count of negligence, the plaintiff is seeking, individually, jointly and severally, compensatory damages in excess of $50,000, punitive damages, interest, delay damages, costs of suit and any other relief as is deemed equitable and just by the Court.
The plaintiff is represented by Miriam Benton Barish and Robert George Devine Jr. of Anapol Weiss, in Philadelphia.
Defendant E.I. du Pont de Nemours and Company is represented by Jason A. Leckerman and Kristen Ann Petagna of Ballard Spahr, in Philadelphia and Cherry Hill, N.J.
U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania case 2:23-cv-03080
Philadelphia County Court of Common Pleas case 230701202
From the Pennsylvania Record: Reach Courts Reporter Nicholas Malfitano at nick.malfitano@therecordinc.com