call 888-811-3090

Camp Lejeune Lawsuit

You May Have Been Exposed to Contaminated Water!

In the 1940s, the initial signs of contamination in the water supply at Camp Lejeune were detected, leading the Navy to declare the water non-potable and close down those particular wells. However, instead of taking measures to ensure the absence of harmful chemical runoff, new wells were established nearby.

Independence Day, silhouette of American Heroes with flag background the bright sky
THIS LAWSUIT WILL NOT AFFECT YOUR ELIGIBILITY TO COLLECT VA DISABILITY BENEFITS.

See If You Qualify For Compensation

Get an immediate, FREE case review!

    yes

    By clicking "Submit," I provide my written consent, authorizing havealawyer.com and one or more law firms, their agents and marketing partners to contact me about my case and other related legal products and services to the number and email address I provided (including any wireless number). I further expressly consent to receive telemarketing email calls, text messages, prerecorded messages and artificial voice messages via an autodialer phone system, even if my telephone number is a mobile number that is currently listed on any state, federal or corporate "Do Not Call" list. I understand that my consent is not a condition to purchase any goods or services and that standard message and data rates apply. By clicking "Submit," I also confirm I have read and agreed to this website's Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.


    Independence Day, silhouette of American Heroes with flag background the bright sky

    In the 1940s, the initial signs of contamination in the water supply at Camp Lejeune were detected, leading the Navy to declare the water non-potable and close down those particular wells. However, instead of taking measures to ensure the absence of harmful chemical runoff, new wells were established nearby.

    THIS LAWSUIT WILL NOT AFFECT YOUR ELIGIBILITY TO COLLECT VA DISABILITY BENEFITS.

    How Do I Get Compensated?

    Fill Out The Form

    Fill in the form to see if you qualify.

    Speak With Our Specialists

    We'll review your submission quickly and then follow up with you.

    Potential Compensation

    Receive the justice and potential compensation that you and your loved ones deserve.

    Camp Lejeune Water Contamination: Health Crisis And Legal Battle

    Camp Lejune soldier drinking later out of a bottle.

    In the 1980s, the United States Marine Corps launched an investigation into potential contamination concerns at Camp Lejeune. They were officially notified that numerous wells on the base were polluted and unsuitable for human use. Despite this notification, the USMC failed to take any measures to protect its personnel and staff. Additionally, in 1983, the USMC presented a report to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) stating that Camp Lejeune had no contamination issues, despite evidence to the contrary.

    In 1984, a subsequent inquiry revealed that the water wells at Camp Lejeune not only had significantly high levels of TCE and PCE but also contained benzene.

    These tainted wells were subsequently shut down, and the state of North Carolina was informed about the TCE and PCE contamination, but the presence of benzene in the water supply was not disclosed. Furthermore, the USMC withheld this information in a federal health report in 1992.

    By 2005, both the Justice Department and the EPA had launched comprehensive investigations into the water contamination at Camp Lejeune. Since then, over 70 different chemical contaminants have been identified in the base's water supply.

    You might be entitled to compensation for your suffering. Find out if you qualify for compensation by completing the form above and gain access to an immediate and FREE case evaluation!

    Who May Have Been Exposed To The Contaminated Water?

    The Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR) estimates that one million people may have been exposed to chemically tainted water at Camp Lejeune between August 1, 1953 and December 31, 1987.

    These include:

    • Active duty Marines, Sailors, and Coast Guard members who worked or trained on site
    • Civilian employees and contractors who worked at the camp
    • Family members of service members and employees who lived on or near Camp Lejeune
    • Visitors who stayed on or near the base for 30 days or longer

    Common Illnesses and Injuries Reported:

    • Non-Hodgkin's lymphoma
    • Parkinson's disease
    • Breast cancer
    • Esophageal cancer
    • Lung cancer
    • Neurobehavioral effects
    • Renal toxicity
    • Scleroderma
    • Miscarriages/Fertility Issues
    • Adult leukemia
    • Aplastic anemia and other myelodysplastic syndromes
    • Bladder cancer
    • Kidney cancer
    • Liver cancer
    • Multiple myeloma

    Lawsuits And Legal Process

    Justice holding scales

    As the adverse health effects of the water contamination surfaced, affected individuals and families initiated legal proceedings to pursue justice and compensation for their hardships. Numerous lawsuits were filed against the U.S. government, alleging negligence, failure to provide adequate warning, and other grievances. These legal actions sought restitution for medical costs, emotional distress, and diminished quality of life. Additionally, corporations accountable for the contamination and its consequences were also targeted in lawsuits.

    Legal Process Key Steps:

    1. FILE A LAWSUIT: The plaintiffs (those affected) engage legal representation and file lawsuits against the parties responsible for the water contamination.

    2. DISCOVERY: Both sides gather evidence through the discovery process, which involves obtaining records, conducting depositions, and gathering experts' opinions.

    3. SETTLEMENT OR TRIAL: Depending on the strength of the evidence and negotiation process, some cases may reach an out-of-court settlement. If a settlement cannot be reached, the case proceeds to trial.

    4. TRIAL AND VERDICT: In a trial, evidence is presented, witnesses testify, and legal arguments are made. A judge or jury decides on the verdict, determining if the defendant(s) were liable and whether damages should be awarded to the plaintiffs.

    If You Were A Victim Of Camp Lejeune Water Contamination, We Can Help

    Have A Lawyer will match you with a qualified attorney who can evaluate your case and help you seek justice and compensation for the injuries you've experienced from exposure to contamination. If you believe you have a case, please contact us so we can guide you to the best possible outcome.

    FIND OUT NOW if you qualify for compensation. Fill out the easy form above and get an immediate and FREE case review!

    What Are the Differences Between Mass Tort And Class Action Lawsuits?

    STRUCTURE

    • Mass Tort: Consists of several individual lawsuits grouped together based on common case details or defendants.
    • Class Action Lawsuit: A single lawsuit developed for a larger group--the "class"--who are represented by a single plaintiff.

    INDIVIDUAL CONTROL

    • Mass Tort: Each individual plaintiff has control over their case and its resolution.
    • Class Action Lawsuit: Members of the class have limited control over the lawsuit, as case decisions are made by the single representative plaintiff and their legal team.

    COMPENSATION

    • Mass Tort: Compensation and settlements are determined case by case, in consideration each plaintiff's unique circumstances and harm suffered.
    • Class Action Lawsuits: Compensation and settlements are typically distributed evenly among all class members, often based on a pro-rata structure.

    APPLICABILITY:

    • Mass Tort: Best for situations when each plaintiff's case is distinguished by different degrees of harm or other circumstances.
    • Class Action Lawsuits: Ideal when the members of the class all share similar claims and a uniform resolution is fair or reasonable.

    EFFICIENCY

    • Mass Tort: Can be more time-consuming and complex since each case may require individual management.
    • Class Action Lawsuits: Generally more efficient as terms, negotiations, and resolutions apply more equally to all claimants.

    Recognizing these distinctions is essential for both plaintiffs and defendants when deciding on the most suitable legal approach for addressing a shared complaint or injury.