July 9, 2015  | by KYLA ASBURY

PARKERSBURG – DuPont was granted partial summary judgment in a 2013 lawsuit against it involving C-8 contamination.

While it was granted partial summary judgment, DuPont still was denied summary judgment as it related to the conscious pain and suffering claims by two individuals; as it related to the battery claims of eight individuals; and as it related to conspiracy claims by three individuals.

“Our main takeaway here is that, once again, DuPont has attempted to escape its obligations to mid-Ohio Valley residents harmed by C-8,” said Jeff Dugas, with Action Network, a nonprofit organization that helped area residents develop Keep Your Promises. “Luckily, Chief Judge Sargus denied that motion, which raises new questions about DuPont disclosure of liabilities — which, as we noted in our June 9th briefing, are already grossly understated. ”

Dugas said that in light of this decision, stakeholders should take another, close look at those disclosures.

In the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Ohio, Chief Judge Edmund A Sargus Jr. denied a motion by DuPont that was intended to severely reduce the company’s obligations to compensate victims of C-8 contamination, according to the July 6 filing.

DuPont’s motion sought to allow the company to backtrack on its promise to honor the findings of the C-8 Science Panel, which identified a probable link between C-8 and six diseases, which include kidney cancer, testicular cancer, thyroid disease, ulcerative colitis, high cholesterol and pregnancy-induced high blood pressure…