The Biggest Class Action Settlements of 2024

$10.3B PFAS Water Contamination Settlement Approved Against 3M

Court: U.S. District Court for the District of South Carolina​

Case Reference: MDL No. 2873

Represented by: Douglas & London, P.C., Motley Rice, Baron & Budd

3M has agreed to a landmark settlement worth up to $10.3 billion to resolve thousands of lawsuits alleging contamination of U.S. water systems with toxic per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), often referred to as "forever chemicals." The payout, to be distributed over 13 years, will fund remediation efforts for public water suppliers that have detected PFAS in their drinking water. PFAS are widely used in industrial applications and consumer products for their resistance to heat, water, and oil, but they have been linked to cancer and other serious health risks. The company emphasized that the settlement does not constitute an admission of liability.

The agreement, which had been pending since mid-2023, received final approval from the U.S. District Court in Charleston, South Carolina in March 2024. The settlement aligns with the Environmental Protection Agency’s recent efforts to establish national drinking water standards for PFAS. In a public statement, 3M CEO Mike Roman said the agreement “builds on our actions that include our announced exit of PFOA and PFOS manufacturing more than 20 years ago.” Notably, 3M intends to fully phase out PFAS production by the end of 2025. The approval follows similar billion-dollar agreements by Chemours, DuPont, and Corteva, underscoring the chemical industry's growing accountability for environmental harm.

Supreme Court Ruling Clears Path for $4B Wildfire Settlement

Court: Maui Circuit Court (Second Circuit Court of Hawaiʻi)

Case Reference: In the Matter of the Petition for the Coordination of Maui Fire Cases, SCRQ-24-0000602

Represented by: Panish | Shea | Ravipudi LLP

Hawaii’s Supreme Court has cleared the way for a $4 billion wildfire settlement by ruling that insurance companies cannot file independent legal claims against parties allegedly responsible for the 2023 Maui blaze. The court determined that laws restricting subrogation rights in healthcare also apply to casualty and property insurance, which means insurers may not initiate separate lawsuits to recoup the over $2.3 billion already paid to policyholders. The ruling removes a significant legal hurdle and returns the case to a Maui judge to continue the settlement process involving thousands of victims and several defendants, including Hawaiian Electric.

The August 2023 wildfire was the deadliest in modern U.S. history, devastating Lahaina, killing over 100 people, and causing an estimated $5.5 billion in damage. Though the insurers argued that subrogation was essential to stabilize the insurance market, plaintiffs’ attorneys warned it would drain available settlement funds and delay recovery. “Now the settlement can take the next step forward,” said plaintiffs’ attorney Gerald Singleton. Governor Josh Green welcomed the decision as a means to expedite healing and rebuilding, noting that “today’s decision will help our people heal much sooner.”

$2.8B Settlement Approved in Blue Cross Antitrust Case

Court: U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Alabama

Case Reference: MDL No. 2406

Represented by: Boies Schiller & Flexner LLP, Hausfeld LLP, Whatley Kallas LLP

In October 2024, a proposed $2.8 billion settlement was reached in the In Re Blue Cross Blue Shield Antitrust Litigation, resolving claims from a class of health care providers who alleged that Blue Cross Blue Shield Association (BCBS) and its member companies engaged in anticompetitive conduct. The providers accused BCBS of suppressing competition through market allocation and fixed pricing mechanisms, including the BlueCard program, which they argue led to underpayments to providers and inflated costs to subscribers. This provider settlement follows an earlier $2.67 billion agreement with subscribers, making it one of the largest antitrust settlements in healthcare to date.

In December 2024, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Alabama granted preliminary approval of the settlement, moving it one step closer to final implementation. According to the court filing, the agreement will not only compensate providers but will also “significantly improve how Providers will interact with the Blues, bringing more transparency and efficiency to their dealings, and increase Blue Plan accountability.” Health care providers who treated BCBS patients between July 2008 and October 2024 may qualify for compensation, with funds allocated based on provider type and historical reimbursement data. While a significant share—92%—of the fund is designated for health care facilities, the remaining funds are available for individual practitioners not involved in a previous settlement.

NCAA, Power Five Agree to $2.8B Settlement Over Athlete NIL Compensation

Court: U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California

Case Reference: House v. NCAA

Represented by: Hagens Berman Sobol Shapiro LLP, Winston & Strawn LLP

The NCAA and the Power Five conferences have agreed to a landmark $2.8 billion settlement to resolve a series of consolidated class action lawsuits alleging violations of antitrust laws. The lawsuits centered on restrictions that historically prevented college athletes from profiting off their name, image, and likeness (NIL), as well as from receiving compensation beyond scholarships. Two primary settlements—the College Athlete NIL Litigation and Hubbard v. NCAA—received preliminary court approval in October 2024. If granted final approval in April 2025, the agreements will compensate thousands of current and former Division I athletes for lost earning opportunities dating back to 2016.

The College Athlete NIL settlement allocates up to $2.576 billion for athletes who played between 2016 and 2024, with automatic payouts designated for Power Five football and basketball players, and additional compensation available to those with verified NIL deals. Meanwhile, the $200 million Hubbard settlement compensates athletes eligible for Academic Achievement Awards between 2019 and 2024. Both settlements also signal future policy changes by the NCAA and Power Five conferences, paving the way for expanded compensation and NIL opportunities for college athletes in the years to come.

GSK Reaches $2.3B Settlement in Zantac Cancer Risk Lawsuits

Court: Delaware Superior Court

Case Reference: MDL No. 2924

Represented by: Watts Law Firm LLP, Moore Law Group, Wisner Baum

GlaxoSmithKline (GSK) has agreed to settle approximately 80,000 product liability claims in state courts related to its discontinued heartburn medication, Zantac. The confidential settlement resolves 93% of the lawsuits alleging that Zantac’s active ingredient, ranitidine, could degrade into a probable human carcinogen, N-nitrosodimethylamine (NDMA), over time. Although GSK maintains it admits no liability and asserts that “there is no consistent or reliable evidence” linking ranitidine to cancer, the company stated that settling the claims was in the “best long-term interests” of shareholders to eliminate significant financial uncertainty. The pharmaceutical giant will incur a $2.2 billion charge, which it will record in its third-quarter financials.

The resolution of these lawsuits comes nearly five years after the FDA first flagged concerns in 2019 about NDMA contamination in ranitidine products, leading to a market-wide recall in 2020. Zantac, once the world’s best-selling drug, had shifted ownership over the years, with companies like Sanofi also facing litigation. Analysts estimate the settlement amount is on the lower end of expected projections, but caution that other litigation risks remain, particularly around GSK’s vaccines portfolio.

$1.5B Tribal Lending Settlement Proposed in Payday Loan Class Action

Court: U.S. District Court for the Western District of Virginia

Case Reference: Fitzgerald v. LDF Holdings

Represented by: Kelly Guzzo PLC

A proposed class action settlement could mark a historic turning point in tribal lending litigation, as borrowers seek preliminary approval from a Virginia federal court for a sweeping $1.4 billion debt cancellation and $37.4 million cash fund. Nearly one million borrowers may benefit from the agreement, which targets high-interest payday loans allegedly disguised as tribally owned to shield them from state usury laws. The loans, which carried interest rates as high as 771%, were issued in states with strong consumer protection laws, including Virginia, Florida, Maryland, and Georgia. Plaintiffs claimed that the scheme violated the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act and state lending laws.

The lawsuit accuses the Lac du Flambeau Band of Lake Superior Chippewa Indians of leveraging its tribal sovereign immunity through partnerships with non-tribal payday lenders like Skytrail Servicing Group LLC, named as the de facto lender. In 2023, U.S. District Judge Norman K. Moon refused to enforce the arbitration clause in borrowers' loan agreements, ruling it violated public policy by limiting recourse to tribal and federal law, excluding state protections. Following 11 mediation sessions, the settlement emerged as “a hard-earned and excellent result considering the circumstances of the litigation,” the borrowers wrote. If approved, it would not shield other alleged co-conspirators from future liability.

$1.4B Settlement With Meta Over Unlawful Use of Facial Recognition Data

Court: Texas State Court

Case Reference: State of Texas v. Meta Platforms, Inc.

Represented by: Texas Attorney General Office, McKool Smith PC, Keller Postman LLC

Meta Platforms Inc. has agreed to pay $1.4 billion to the state of Texas to settle allegations that it violated the state’s biometric privacy laws by collecting and using facial recognition data without consent. The case stems from a 2022 lawsuit filed by Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, which accused Meta of deploying facial recognition technology through features like Facebook’s Tag Suggestions without notifying or securing authorization from users. This, according to the lawsuit, ran afoul of the state’s 2009 biometric privacy statute, which mandates that companies must obtain informed consent before collecting sensitive biometric identifiers such as facial geometry or fingerprints.

The settlement, the largest ever obtained by a single state for a privacy violation, will be paid over five years, beginning with a $500 million installment due within the month. While Meta denies any wrongdoing and does not admit liability, the agreement includes new compliance requirements, such as notifying the Attorney General’s office of any biometric data-related activities that may fall under state law. “This historic settlement demonstrates our commitment to standing up to the world’s biggest technology companies,” Paxton said, adding that any abuse of Texans’ sensitive data “will be met with the full force of the law.”

$1.37B Opioid Settlement Finalized With Kroger Over Pharmacy Practices

Court: U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Ohio

Case Reference: MDL No. 2804

Represented by: Baron & Budd

Kroger finalized a $1.37 billion nationwide settlement to resolve claims tied to its role in the opioid epidemic. The agreement, spearheaded by Baron & Budd and its President Russell Budd, directs funds to states, counties, municipalities, and tribal governments. Plaintiffs alleged that Kroger failed to comply with its “corresponding responsibility” under federal and state law by dispensing opioid prescriptions despite red flags and improperly monitoring suspicious opioid orders within its distribution network. The company, which operates over 2,000 pharmacies, faced extensive litigation over its alleged failure to prevent diversion and misuse of prescription opioids.

The resolution is a critical part of the broader national opioid litigation efforts, pushing the cumulative total of opioid settlements to over $50 billion. “This settlement represents a significant step toward holding corporate actors accountable for their role in the opioid crisis,” said Russell Budd. The litigation accused Kroger of prioritizing profits over public health, contributing to a crisis marked by addiction, overdose deaths, and long-term societal harm. The funds are intended to support addiction recovery efforts and offset the strain the epidemic has placed on public health systems and communities.

Settlement Finalized Against DuPont, Chemours, and Corteva

Court: U.S. District Court for the District of South Carolina

Case Reference: MDL No. 2873

Represented by: Baron & Budd, Motley Rice

In a sweeping class action settlement, chemical companies DuPont, Chemours, and Corteva agreed to a $1.185 billion deal to address claims that their firefighting foam products leached toxic perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) into public drinking water systems across the United States. Often referred to as "forever chemicals," PFAS are notorious for their persistence in both environmental and human systems. The settlement seeks to remediate contaminated public water systems and support testing efforts for those at risk of PFAS exposure. The agreement applies to over 300 lawsuits filed since 2018 and includes all public systems required to test for PFAS or those with at least one contaminated source. Importantly, the deal allows individual plaintiffs to pursue future claims related to soil and groundwater contamination.

Despite preliminary approval in August 2023, the settlement faced opposition from several municipalities, including Vancouver, Tacoma, and DuPont, Washington, which argued the deal inadequately compensated for widespread harm. “It pales in comparison to the PFAS-related damages that defendants have caused across the country,” the cities asserted. Nevertheless, U.S. District Judge Richard Gergel upheld the agreement, stating that the proposed settlement satisfied legal standards of adequacy even without a trial. Chemours will pay half of the total amount, while DuPont and Corteva will cover the remainder, as laid out in a 2021 Memorandum of Understanding. This resolution marks a significant step in PFAS litigation and parallels a separate $12.5 billion proposed settlement with 3M, which remains pending.

$1.1B Settlement Reached in Philips CPAP Injury Litigation

Court: U.S. District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania

Case Reference: MDL No. 3014

Represented by: Seeger Weiss LLP, Levin Sedran & Berman LLP, Lynch Carpenter LLP, Chimicles Schwartz Kriner & Donaldson-Smith LLP

Philips has agreed to a $1.1 billion settlement to resolve personal injury claims stemming from its recall of millions of CPAP and ventilator machines, which were sold under the Philips Respironics brand between 2008 and 2021. The devices, used to treat sleep apnea and other respiratory conditions, were subject to a Class I recall—the FDA’s most serious—after concerns emerged about the degradation of sound-abatement foam, which could break down and release harmful particles or gases. Since the recall began in 2021, the FDA has received over 116,000 medical device reports, including more than 500 related deaths. Despite the settlement, Philips denies any liability or wrongdoing.

The deal, mediated by retired U.S. Magistrate Judge Diane Welsh, includes $25 million for medical monitoring and will compensate individuals who sustained significant injuries linked to the recalled machines. Over 58,000 users have filed or registered claims. The funds are expected to be disbursed in 2025, pending court approval in Pennsylvania. This personal injury settlement follows a separate class action resolution addressing economic damages, valued at over $613 million, which provides reimbursement for costs incurred by users and insurers. While these settlements aim to bring resolution, Philips still faces reputational and legal challenges in the wake of the recall.

Conclusion

The major class action settlements of 2024 reflect a broader shift toward heightened corporate accountability across industries. From environmental contamination and consumer product safety to antitrust and privacy violations, companies faced unprecedented legal exposure and multibillion-dollar payouts. These resolutions signal a strong judicial and regulatory commitment to addressing systemic harms and ensuring compensation for affected individuals and communities. As litigation continues to evolve, these outcomes may serve as a catalyst for more proactive corporate compliance and increased vigilance in safeguarding public health, consumer rights, and ethical business practices.