top of page
  • Writer's pictureJust Well Law

Star Advertiser: Red Hill Trial Must Set Firm Precedent

The editorial by the Honolulu Star Advertiser covers the Red Hill trial.

In November 2021, the Red Hill Bulk Fuel Storage Facility in Hawaii experienced a catastrophic jet fuel spill, contaminating the local water supply and affecting over 93,000 residents. This incident has led to a landmark class-action lawsuit against the U.S. Navy, with victims seeking compensation for ongoing health problems caused by the contaminated water. The lawsuit, filed by Kristian Baehr of Just Well Law in Austin, Texas, is now in trial, being heard by U.S. District Judge Leslie Kobayashi.

The plaintiffs in the lawsuit have shared compelling stories of trauma and injury, including severe esophageal burns and the need for multiple surgeries. Despite the Navy admitting responsibility for the fuel leak and some liability, its lawyers argue that the plaintiffs' health problems were not caused by the contaminated water. They claims that the crisis was exaggerated and that the Navy responded promptly to the situation.

A significant point of contention in the trial is the Navy's handling of water samples taken after the spill. The Navy discarded 1,000 samples without testing them, arguing that testing for total petroleum hydrocarbons was not required. This decision has hindered efforts to fully understand the extent of the contamination and its impact on residents. The plaintiffs' legal team and toxic torts attorney Kristian Baehr argues that this lack of testing has exacerbated the health problems faced by those exposed to the tainted water.

The trial is crucial in determining the level of compensation for the initial 17 plaintiffs, who are among thousands of others in related lawsuits. The outcome will set a precedent for future cases, influencing the level of accountability and reparations the Navy will face. Beyond financial compensation, the lawsuit seeks to highlight the need for stricter oversight and safety protocols to prevent similar incidents in the future.

The Navy's response to the spill has been heavily criticized for its lack of transparency and urgency. When reports of water contamination first surfaced, the Navy was slow to provide clinical support and testing for those with symptoms. Internal investigations revealed that Navy officials did not immediately inform superiors or state officials about the spill, and only acknowledged the contamination after increasing public concern and intervention from the state Department of Health.

As the trial progresses, the focus remains on proving the direct link between the contaminated water and the health issues experienced by the plaintiffs. The Navy's actions during and after the spill, including the failure to test the water samples, have been presented as evidence of deep culpability. The trial underscores the importance of government accountability and transparency, and the need for timely and transparent responses to environmental disasters.

The outcome of this trial will have significant implications for the thousands of other plaintiffs involved in related lawsuits and for future cases involving environmental negligence. It serves as a critical reminder of the devastating consequences of negligence and the need for robust safety measures to protect public health. The Red Hill fuel spill lawsuit is not just about financial compensation; it is about ensuring that such a disaster never happens again and that those responsible are held accountable.

Read the article at Honolulu Star Advertiser.


bottom of page