A Harris County jury has ordered 3M Co. to pay $61.5 million to 24 plaintiffs who sued over harms tied to the Jan. 24, 2020 explosion at the Watson Grinding and Manufacturing facility in northwest Houston. The blast, which occurred near a residential area, killed three people and was reported to have injured dozens more. It was also reported to have damaged hundreds of nearby homes and businesses, including destruction or damage to more than 450 surrounding properties. Watson Grinding filed for bankruptcy soon after the explosion, and litigation has continued for years as survivors pursue compensation through multi-district litigation (MDL) involving thousands of claimants.
$61.5 Million Verdict for 24 Plaintiffs Against 3M
The most recent verdict was handed down Monday, awarding $61.5 million to two dozen homeowners who sued 3M in connection with the explosion at the Watson Grinding facility near 4500 Gessner Road. The plaintiffs’ claims focused on 3M’s alleged role in inspecting the facility’s gas detection system. In advancing the case to a jury, plaintiffs’ counsel emphasized that 3M was responsible for inspecting the system and failed to properly perform that work, a theory the jury ultimately accepted in returning the verdict.
Trial testimony further asserted that failures tied to servicing the facility’s gas detection and alarm systems turned a preventable gas leak into a historic disaster. The testimony also asserted that 3M had actual knowledge for years leading up to the explosion that the Watson gas detection system was defective. The verdict adds another substantial jury award to a litigation landscape shaped by property damage claims and personal impacts tied to the explosion and its aftermath.
Investigative Findings on the Propylene Leak and Alarm System Failure
Federal investigators traced the explosion to a propylene leak that ignited when a worker turned on a light switch. In 2023, the U.S. Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board determined the explosion was caused by a degraded and poorly crimped rubber welding hose. According to that determination, the hose leaked propylene, a flammable gas, throughout the building overnight, creating conditions for a catastrophic ignition event the next day.
The U.S. Chemical Safety Board also found that the plant’s gas detection and alarm system failed to alert workers to the dangerous buildup of propylene before the explosion. Those findings have framed central factual disputes in civil litigation, including how gas detection and alarm systems should perform in industrial environments where flammable gases may accumulate. In the Watson Grinding litigation, the performance and servicing of detection and alarm systems has remained a central factual issue because it bears on whether the incident was preventable and which entities may bear responsibility for the failure to detect escalating danger.
Bellwether Verdicts, Pending Trials, and the Appeals Horizon
The $61.5 million verdict is described as the third time a Harris County jury has returned a multimillion-dollar verdict for victims of the explosion, and as the third verdict against 3M since litigation stemming from the incident began. It is also described as the third successful bellwether trial in the multi-district litigation holding 3M responsible for the explosion. Two prior verdicts were described as totaling over $156 million, reflecting a pattern of substantial jury findings in the bellwether track.
Earlier cases include a jury award of nearly $38 million last June to five victims for damages they or their property sustained from the explosion. Another case resulted in a November jury order that Watson Grinding and 3M pay $118 million to plaintiffs, described as a separate Harris County jury awarding survivors $118 million that month. According to Kwok Daniel, more than 2,000 plaintiffs are awaiting trial in litigation related to the explosion, and more than 2,000 additional plaintiffs in the multi-district litigation are still awaiting trial dates, with another trial scheduled for October. The timeline for payment remains uncertain, with statements indicating the appeals process could extend for years before any awarded money is ultimately paid.
Parties’ Public Positions and Ongoing Litigation Posture
Following Monday’s verdict, 3M stated it did not agree with the jury’s decision and indicated it will appeal. 3M also previously stated after the November $118 million verdict that it disagreed with that jury’s decision and planned to appeal as well. The continuing posture signals that post-trial motions and appellate review are expected to shape the pace and finality of recoveries in the Watson Grinding litigation, even as additional trials remain scheduled.
Counsel for plaintiffs also publicly addressed the verdict and the broader litigation trajectory. Robert Kwok, identified as a lead attorney in the lawsuit and lead plaintiffs counsel, stated that additional work remains and expressed the view that 3M continues to deny responsibility connected to the explosion and to resist paying losses claimed by community members. Attorney Ryan Loya likewise indicated that the case is expected to continue. The trial team was identified as including Kwok Daniel attorneys Rob Kwok, Ryan Loya, Ranny S. Sawaf, and Marcos H. Cardenas, along with William Moye of Moye Law Firm, Adam Lewis of Arnold & Itkin, and Adam Anthony of The Anthony Law Firm.
