Plaintiffs in PFAS lawsuit seek to file amended complaint

Just over a year after a group of Town of Stella property owners filed a federal lawsuit against the current and former owners of the Rhinelander paper mill and chemical giant 3M related to alleged drinking water contamination the plaintiffs have asked the presiding judge to allow them to amend their complaint for a second time.

According to a motion filed Sept. 25 in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Wisconsin, the purpose of the second amended complaint would be to “reflect the current parties” and “generally amplify and clarify earlier actual allegations based on information presently known...”

The plaintiffs are also seeking to specify the class representatives, clarify and assert personal injury claims for a number of the plaintiffs, add additional parties and assert a subclass and additional claim against the paper mill defendants, according to the motion.

In addition to the previously leveled allegations related to contaminated drinking water, the proposed second amended complaint also references “significant contamination in multiple water bodies in or near Stella,” according to copy of the document filed with the motion.

The original complaint — alleging that the spread of PFAS-contaminated sludge/fibercake from the Rhinelander paper mill on local farmlands contaminated private wells — was filed in August 2023. An amended complaint, which included additional plaintiffs, was filed in February. 

Neither of those filings included specific references to the contamination of water bodies, only drinking water.

It should be noted that the River News is not immediately reporting on the full contents of the second amended complaint because, as of press time, the court had not yet granted the plaintiffs’ request to file the pleading. Should that permission be granted, the newspaper anticipates publishing a follow-up story.

PFAS are a group of man-made, fluorinated chemicals manufactured and used since the 1940s. Because they are designed to be stable and unreactive to water, grease, heat, and other elements, they are often referred to as “forever” compounds. 

Studies have shown a link between human exposure to PFAS and adverse health effects.

The plaintiffs’ first amended complaint, filed in February, alleged some the plaintiffs have experienced various health issues including kidney cancer, kidney disease, thyroid disease and high cholesterol.

The contamination in Stella was discovered in late 2022 through a DNR-led state testing program. As of April, the department reported that 56 private wells in the Stella area have been found to have concentrations of PFAS that are greater than recommended health guidelines.

The defendants  — Ahlstrom-Munksjo, Wausau Paper (the current and former owners of the Rhinelander paper mill) and chemical giant 3M (which is alleged to have sold PFAS-containing products to the mill) — have mounted a vigorous response to the lawsuit. 

Among other things, the defendants have argued that land-spreading is a common practice, regulated by the DNR, that does not meet the legal definition of a “hazardous activity” as is required for the plaintiffs to prevail on their strict liability claim.

The defendants have also indicated they intend to intend to “vigorously oppose” any attempt by the plaintiffs to have the lawsuit certified as a “class action” as it is their belief that none of the  claims meet the “rigorous standards” for class certification.

As previously reported, the requirements for a class actions are as follows:

• The number of class members renders it impracticable to join them in the action

• The class members’ claims share common questions of law or fact

• The claims or defenses of the proposed class representatives are typical of those for the rest of the class, and

• The proposed class representatives will adequately protect the interests of the entire class. 

Court records indicate the parties do not expect the court to rule on the question of class certification until late 2025 at the earliest.

Meanwhile, the defendants have until Oct. 9 to reply to the plaintiffs’ request to amend their complaint for a second time.

At present, the case is scheduled for jury trial in September 2026.

Heather Schaefer may be reached at [email protected].