A former firefighter has filed a lawsuit against several major corporations, alleging that their products containing per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) have caused him serious health issues, including cancer. William Danaher filed the complaint in the Circuit Court of Cook County, Illinois, on April 29, 2025, naming companies such as 3M Company and Tyco Fire Products L.P. among others as defendants.
The lawsuit details how Danaher was exposed to PFAS through firefighting gear and foam manufactured by these companies. PFAS are synthetic chemicals used for their resistance to heat, water, and oil but are known as "forever chemicals" due to their persistence in the environment and human body. According to the complaint, these substances have been linked to various health problems including cancers and immune system disorders. Danaher claims that despite knowing the dangers of PFAS for decades, the defendants continued to manufacture and sell products containing these chemicals without warning users about potential health risks.
Danaher wore protective clothing known as "turnouts" and used Class B firefighting foam during his career in Illinois. He alleges that these products contained harmful levels of PFAS which he unknowingly absorbed through skin contact and inhalation over many years. The lawsuit accuses the companies of failing to provide adequate warnings or safety information about the presence of PFAS in their products. Danaher discovered the link between his exposure to these chemicals and his cancer diagnosis less than two years before filing this lawsuit.
The plaintiff is seeking monetary damages for his injuries and claims that each defendant derived substantial revenue from selling PFAS-containing products in Illinois. The complaint argues that the companies should have anticipated the consequences of their actions within the state due to their business activities there.
Represented by Corboy & Demetrio P.C., William Danaher is demanding a jury trial for this case (Case ID: 2025L005674). The presiding judge's name is not mentioned in the document.