Camp Lejeune Poisoned Its Own: What 400,000 Claimants Need to Know About the Justice Act, the Government’s Settlement Offers, and the Bellwether Trials That Could Decide Everything
If you are reading this, you probably already know the worst part. You were at Camp Lejeune — or your mother was, or your father was, or your husband was — and somebody in your family got sick in a way that does not happen to healthy people without a reason. You may have filed a claim with the Navy under the Camp Lejeune Justice Act. You may have received a settlement offer from the Department of Justice that feels insultingly low. You may be staring at a number like $150,000 or $300,000 on a government form while your medical bills climb past a million dollars and the disease the base gave you is still in your body.
We are not going to tell you that everything is going to be fine. We are going to tell you the truth about where this litigation stands, what the government’s offer is actually worth, what your case may be worth if it goes to trial, and what the science says about the water that was colorless, odorless, and tasteless — and that the Marines and their families drank, cooked with, and bathed in for decades before anyone told them it was poisoned.
The Camp Lejeune Justice Act created a federal cause of action that overrides the North Carolina statute of limitations that had blocked these claims for decades. It gave anyone who spent 30 or more days at the base between August 1, 1953, and December 31, 1987, a two-year window to file an administrative claim with the Navy. By the time that window closed in August 2024, the Navy faced 408,860 administrative claims and 3,718 lawsuits filed in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina. Approximately two dozen bellwether cases — selected to represent each illness category linked to the contamination by the CDC’s Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry — are now moving toward potential trial in 2026, with four federal judges consistently ruling against the Department of Justice’s motions challenging causation.
This page is for you. Not for the government. Not for the adjuster. For the person who was poisoned by the institution they trusted, who is trying to figure out whether the number on the settlement form is fair or whether they are being told to take pennies on the dollar for a life that was stolen. We are Attorney911 — The Manginello Law Firm, PLLC. We handle toxic exposure and wrongful death cases. We are writing this as the resource we wish someone had given us if we were sitting at your kitchen table. If you want to talk to us after you finish reading, the call is free: 1-888-ATTY-911.
The Camp Lejeune Justice Act: What It Created and Who Qualifies
The Eligibility Framework
The Camp Lejeune Justice Act was enacted as part of the PACT Act in 2022 — the same legislation that expanded health coverage for veterans exposed to toxic burn pits and other service-related contaminants. The CLJA created an express federal cause of action for individuals who were exposed to contaminated water at Camp Lejeune for at least 30 days between August 1, 1953, and December 31, 1987, and who suffered harm. It overrode the prior jurisdictional and limitations barriers that had blocked North Carolina state-law claims for decades — because North Carolina’s statute of limitations had run out long before most of these diseases were diagnosed, and the state’s contributory negligence regime (one of the most restrictive in the nation) would have barred recovery for any claimant found even partially at fault.
The CLJA’s framework works in two steps:
Step 1 — Administrative claim with the Navy. The claimant files an administrative claim with the Department of the Navy. The Navy has six months to resolve the claim. If the Navy does not resolve it within six months, the claimant may treat that inaction as a denial and proceed to Step 2.
Step 2 — Federal lawsuit. The claimant files a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina. This is the exclusive venue. The claim cannot be filed in state court, and it cannot be filed in any other federal district.
The two-year claim window — August 2022 through August 2024 — has now closed. This means the universe of eligible claimants is fixed. If you did not file an administrative claim with the Navy by the August 2024 deadline, the CLJA’s cause of action is no longer available to you. If you did file — and 408,860 people did — you are now in the system, and the question is no longer whether you can sue but whether you should accept the government’s settlement offer or hold out for the bellwether trials.
What the CLJA Does NOT Say
Here is something the Department of Justice does not want you to notice: the CLJA does not contain a 35-year diagnosis limitation. It does not say your diagnosis must come within 35 years of your exposure. It does not cap damages. It does not create a settlement matrix. It does not say the government’s elective option is the maximum you can recover. Every one of those restrictions was created by the DOJ and the Navy after the statute was passed — imposed unilaterally, without input from the scientific community, without input from the plaintiffs’ bar, and without any act of Congress.
The 35-year diagnosis limitation is the most cruel and the most arbitrary. It says that if your disease was diagnosed more than 35 years after your exposure ended, you do not qualify for the elective settlement option. Consider what that means for someone like a man who was born at Camp Lejeune in 1968 — exposed to contaminated water even in his mother’s womb — and was diagnosed with male breast cancer at age 39. That is 39 years after exposure. The DOJ says: too late. His treatment costs have exceeded $1 million. The DOJ’s elective option would have offered him $150,000 — if he qualified. He does not, because of a limitation the DOJ invented.
The statute does not impose that limitation. Congress did not impose it. The science does not support it — the latency periods for many of these contaminants extend well beyond 35 years. The DOJ imposed it because it reduces the number of claims the government has to pay and because it creates a dividing line that lets the government argue, case by case, that a claimant’s disease is “too distant” from the exposure to be connected.
The four federal judges assigned to the CLJA litigation have been consistently ruling against the DOJ’s motions challenging causation. They have signaled that they want the bellwether cases moving toward trial. The judges are not endorsing the DOJ’s 35-year limitation. They are not endorsing the elective option framework. They are letting the cases proceed — which means the bellwether trials may establish what these claims are actually worth when a federal judge applies the CLJA’s remedies without the DOJ’s self-imposed constraints.
The DOJ Elective Option: Why Most Seriously Injured Claimants Reject It
What the Elective Option Pays
In September 2023, the DOJ announced its “elective option” settlement framework. The offers are tiered based on two variables: the amount of time the claimant spent at Camp Lejeune and the type of health problem suffered.
- Living claimants: $100,000 to $450,000, depending on exposure duration and disease category.
- Cases of premature death: An additional $100,000 on top of the living-claimant amount.
- Maximum possible elective-option payout: Approximately $550,000 for a death case with the longest exposure duration and the most severe disease category.
Why These Numbers Are Grossly Inadequate for Serious Cases
The elective option was designed without input from the scientific community, without input from the plaintiffs’ attorneys, and without any negotiation. The DOJ decided the tiers, the dollar amounts, and the 35-year diagnosis limitation on its own. The result is a framework that systematically undervalues the most serious claims.
Consider the economics. The article cites one claimant — a man born at Camp Lejeune in 1968, diagnosed with male breast cancer 39 years later — whose treatment costs have exceeded $1 million. Under the elective option, he would qualify for $150,000 because he spent only a year at Camp Lejeune (mostly in his mother’s womb). But even that $150,000 is unavailable to him because the DOJ’s guidelines say a diagnosis must come within 35 years of exposure. He was 39 when he was diagnosed. Four years too late — under a limitation that Congress never enacted.
Consider the math for a living claimant with kidney cancer whose treatment has cost $750,000 and who has been unable to work for two years. The elective option might offer $250,000. That does not cover the medical bills. It does not cover the lost wages. It does not cover the pain, the fear, the years taken from a life. And it does not cover the future — the ongoing treatment, the surveillance scans, the possibility of recurrence.
The elective option is a floor, not a ceiling. It is the government’s opening bid — the minimum it is willing to pay to make claims go away quickly. It is not a valuation of what your case is worth. It is a litigation tactic designed to resolve the cheapest claims fast and to pressure the remaining claimants into accepting less than their cases are worth by creating the impression that the government has established a “fair” framework.
The fact that fewer than 1 percent of all claimants have accepted elective-option offers tells you everything you need to know about whether the government’s numbers are fair. The people who are accepting are, overwhelmingly, the ones with shorter exposure durations, less severe diagnoses, and diagnoses that fit within the 35-year window — the claims the government was willing to pay a modest amount to close. The seriously injured claimants — the ones with seven-figure medical expenses, with debilitating chronic diseases, with wrongful death claims — are holding out. They are waiting for the bellwether trials. They are waiting for a federal judge to tell them what their suffering is worth — not what the government unilaterally decided it was worth.
If you want a deeper analysis of how case value is built in toxic exposure claims — how a life-care planner prices the future, how a forensic economist reduces it to present value, how the human losses are quantified — our toxic tort practice page walks through the framework in detail.
The Defendant: The United States Government as the Party That Poisoned Its Own
Who Is on the Hook
The sole defendant under the CLJA’s framework is the United States Department of the Navy / Department of Defense. The Navy operated Camp Lejeune and its water-distribution system. The Navy controlled the waste disposal practices that contaminated the aquifer. The Navy owed a duty of care to the Marines, dependents, and civilian workers on the installation. The Department of Justice defends the claims and administers the elective-option settlement framework on behalf of the government.
This is not a case against a private corporation with an insurance policy and a balance sheet. This is a case against the federal government — the same government that wrote the CLJA, the same government that administers the elective option, and the same government that is fighting the claims in court. The CLJA was Congress’s acknowledgment that the government owed these victims a remedy. The DOJ’s litigation posture is the executive branch’s attempt to minimize what that remedy costs.
There is also a potential third-party dimension. The article references the dumping of cleaning solvents, fuel, batteries, and ammunition waste on base soils. Private contractors who transported, deposited, or managed these wastes may share responsibility — depending on whether the CLJA’s framework permits or requires third-party claims, and whether such contractors can be identified through historical procurement and disposal records. This is a discovery target, not a present defendant — but it is a thread that should be pulled.
The Betrayal Dimension
These are Marines and military families who were poisoned by their own government while serving their country. The betrayal-of-trust dimension is not just emotionally resonant — it is legally relevant to damages. Non-economic damages in these cases — pain and suffering, loss of quality of life, emotional distress from decades of untreated illness and government stonewalling — are significant precisely because the harm came from the institution these families trusted most.
A Marine who enlisted to serve his country was poisoned by the water his country gave him. His wife, who followed him to base housing, was poisoned by the water she used to cook his dinner. His daughter, conceived at the base, was poisoned before she was born. She died of leukemia at age nine. That is not just a damages calculation. It is a story that a federal judge will hear — and that the DOJ’s $100,000 death supplement cannot begin to address.
For families who lost someone, the wrongful death claim framework provides the structure for what is recoverable — but the CLJA’s specific interaction with North Carolina’s wrongful death and survival damages frameworks is one of the contested issues the bellwether trials may help resolve.
The Government’s Playbook: Tactics and Counters
The DOJ’s approach to the CLJA litigation follows a recognizable pattern — one that Lupe Peña, our associate attorney, knows from the inside. Before he joined our firm, Lupe spent years at a national insurance-defense firm, where he sat in the rooms where adjusters and their software decided how to deny, delay, and devalue people exactly like the CLJA claimants. He knows the playbook because he used to run it. Now he uses that knowledge for injured clients. The tactics the DOJ is running are the same tactics private insurers run — just with a bigger defendant and a sovereign-immunity wrapper.
Play 1: The Causation Challenge
The play: The DOJ files motions challenging specific causation — arguing that each claimant cannot prove that this disease was caused by this exposure. The motions are filed by the dozen, creating delay and overwhelming the plaintiffs’ resources.
The counter: The CLJA was enacted precisely because Congress determined the ATSDR evidence sufficient to warrant a judicial remedy. The four assigned federal judges have consistently rejected the DOJ’s causation motions. The pattern of judicial rejections should be leveraged in pretrial briefing — the government has lost this argument repeatedly, and the judges are signaling that they want the cases tried, not dismissed. The general-causation foundation (ATSDR/CDC findings) plus the exposure documentation (30+ days at a contaminated water source) plus the disease category matching (diagnosis falls within an ATSDR-linked category) plus the temporal relationship (diagnosis after exposure, within a scientifically consistent latency window) is a framework the courts have accepted.
Play 2: The 35-Year Diagnosis Limitation
The play: The DOJ’s elective-option guidelines say a diagnosis must come within 35 years of exposure. Claimants whose diagnoses fall outside that window are told they do not qualify for the elective option — and many of them self-disqualify, assuming the limitation is statutory law.
The counter: The 35-year limitation is not in the CLJA. It is not in any act of Congress. It is a DOJ-created guideline with no scientific basis — the latency periods for many of the contaminants at Camp Lejeune extend well beyond 35 years. Claimants diagnosed outside the 35-year window should not self-disqualify. They should not assume the limitation applies to their case at trial. A federal judge applying the CLJA’s remedies is not bound by the DOJ’s elective-option guidelines — and the bellwether trials may establish that the 35-year limitation is ultra vires, beyond the government’s statutory authority.
Play 3: The Low Settlement Offer
The play: The DOJ offers $100,000 to $450,000 under the elective option — numbers that sound like real money to someone who has been waiting years for any acknowledgment, but that are a fraction of what a serious case is worth. The offer arrives with a deadline. The implication is: take this now, or get nothing.
The counter: The elective option is a floor, not a ceiling. The DOJ’s demonstrated willingness to increase offer volume as the bellwether trials approach suggests that pressure from approaching trials may yield improved offers for claimants whose counsel hold firm. The DOJ’s $335 trillion aggregate-exposure figure, while inflated for rhetorical effect, signals the government’s own recognition that the true liability dwarfs the $691 million approved across all settlements to date. A claimant whose cancer treatment has cost $1 million is not going to recover fair value by accepting a $150,000 elective-option offer — and the bellwether trials may establish valuations several times higher.
Play 4: Delay Through Motions
The play: The DOJ files motion after motion — motions to dismiss, motions for summary judgment, motions to exclude expert testimony, motions to compel arbitration (where applicable), motions on every procedural and evidentiary issue imaginable. The purpose is not to win each motion. The purpose is to delay, to exhaust, to make the claimant feel that the litigation will never end and that the elective option is the only way out.
The counter: The four federal judges are signaling that they have had enough. They are “canning these nonsensical motions,” as one advocate put it. They want the bellwether cases off their docket. The pattern of judicial rulings against the government is accelerating — which means the delay tactic is backfiring. The more the DOJ delays, the more the judges push back, and the closer the bellwether trials get. A claimant who holds firm is riding a wave that is moving toward trial, not away from it.
Play 5: The $335 Trillion Rhetoric
The play: The DOJ announces that claimants are seeking $335 trillion in aggregate damages — a number so vast that it sounds absurd and that is clearly designed to turn members of Congress against the victims by making the liability sound catastrophic and unreasonable.
The counter: The $335 trillion figure is rhetoric, not math. It would mean that each of the 400,000 claimants was seeking an average payout of $837.5 million — a number no serious plaintiff attorney has ever suggested. The figure is the DOJ’s own calculation, designed to serve the government’s political narrative, not to reflect the actual aggregate value of the claims. The real aggregate value — based on case-value ranges of $200,000 to $5,000,000 per claimant — is enormous but nowhere near $335 trillion. The rhetoric is a tell: the government is worried about the real number, and it is inflating the perceived number to make the real one seem more reasonable by comparison.
How a Camp Lejeune Case Is Actually Built
Here is the chronological walk of how a CLJA case is constructed — from the moment a claimant contacts counsel through the bellwether trial that may determine what the claim is worth.
Week one: Evidence preservation. The preservation letter goes out to the Navy JAG, to the federal records custodians, to the DOJ, and to any third-party contractors identified in initial research. The letter demands that all water-quality testing records, waste disposal records, personnel records, housing records, and medical records be preserved and produced. FOIA requests are filed for the base’s historical environmental records and the ATSDR’s underlying data sets. The claimant’s own medical records are pulled — from military treatment facilities, from the VA, from every civilian provider who has treated the diagnosed condition.
Weeks two through eight: Exposure documentation. The claimant’s military personnel file is pulled from the NPRC. Dependent enrollment records, base housing assignments, and orders showing Camp Lejeune duty are assembled. The water supply system that served the claimant’s housing area is identified — because different areas of the base were served by different well systems, and the contaminant levels varied by system and by time period. The exposure duration is quantified — not just “30+ days” but the specific dates, the specific housing, the specific water source.
Months two through six: Medical documentation and causation analysis. The claimant’s complete medical record is assembled and reviewed. A treating physician or board-certified specialist is engaged to provide a specific-causation opinion — connecting the claimant’s diagnosis to the documented exposure using the ATSDR’s general-causation findings as the scientific foundation. Alternative causes are screened and addressed: family history, smoking history, occupational exposures outside Camp Lejeune, and other risk factors for the diagnosed disease. The claimant’s treatment costs are itemized — every hospital bill, every pharmacy record, every explanation of benefits.
Months six through twelve: Discovery and expert development. If the case is in litigation (the claim was denied or deemed denied after six months), written discovery is served on the government. Depositions of Navy environmental officers, base water-system operators, and ATSDR investigators are taken. The government’s own documents — the internal testing results, the internal communications about the contamination, the timeline of what was known and when — are produced and analyzed. Expert witnesses are retained: a toxicologist to address dose reconstruction, an epidemiologist to address general causation, an oncologist or neurologist to address specific causation, a life-care planner to address future medical needs, and a forensic economist to address lost earning capacity.
Months twelve through twenty-four: Pretrial motions and bellwether preparation. The government files its motions — to dismiss, for summary judgment, to exclude experts. The plaintiffs’ legal team responds, leveraging the pattern of judicial rejections of DOJ causation challenges. The bellwether cases are prepared for trial — the strongest cases in each disease category, with the clearest exposure documentation and the most compelling specific-causation opinions.
The bellwether trial. A federal judge in the Eastern District of North Carolina hears the evidence. The ATSDR findings are presented. The claimant’s exposure is documented. The specific-causation opinion is offered. The government’s cross-examination tests the strength of the link. The judge decides what the case is worth — and that decision becomes the framework for every other case in that disease category.
This is the process. It is slow — the article’s advocates describe it as “like waiting for a baby to be born” with “false labor” that makes your “motivation and urgency wanes.” But the process is moving. The judges are pushing. The bellwether trials are approaching. And the outcome of those trials will shape what every remaining claimant is offered — or what they can win at trial if the government refuses to offer enough.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the Camp Lejeune Justice Act?
The Camp Lejeune Justice Act is a federal law enacted in 2022 as part of the PACT Act. It creates a federal cause of action for anyone who was exposed to contaminated drinking water at Marine Corps Base Camp Lejeune for at least 30 days between August 1, 1953, and December 31, 1987, and who suffered harm. It overrides the North Carolina statute of limitations that had previously blocked these claims and allows claimants to file administrative claims with the Navy and, if those claims are not resolved within six months, to file lawsuits in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina.
I filed a CLJA claim and received an elective-option offer. Should I accept it?
That depends entirely on the specifics of your case — your exposure duration, your diagnosis, your treatment costs, your prognosis, and whether your diagnosis falls within the DOJ’s 35-year window. For claimants with minor injuries and short exposures, the elective option may be reasonable. For claimants with serious diseases — cancer, Parkinson’s, conditions requiring expensive ongoing treatment — the elective option is almost certainly a fraction of what the case is worth. Do not accept without having an attorney evaluate your claim’s trial value.
What is the 35-year diagnosis limitation?
The DOJ’s elective-option guidelines say that a claimant’s diagnosis must come within 35 years of their exposure to the contaminated water at Camp Lejeune. This limitation is not in the Camp Lejeune Justice Act. It is not in any act of Congress. It was created by the DOJ unilaterally, without scientific input or input from the plaintiffs’ bar. The latency periods for many of the contaminants at Camp Lejeune — particularly for cancers caused by TCE, PCE, and vinyl chloride — can extend well beyond 35 years. If your diagnosis falls outside the 35-year window, you should not assume your case has no value. The limitation applies to the elective option, not to the statute, and a federal judge at trial is not bound by it.
Can I still file a Camp Lejeune claim?
The CLJA’s two-year claim window closed in August 2024. If you did not file an administrative claim with the Navy by that deadline, the CLJA’s cause of action is no longer available to you. If you did file — and 408,860 people did — you are in the system and your claim is active. There may be narrow equitable-tolling arguments in exceptional circumstances, but you should not rely on them without speaking to an attorney immediately.
How long will the litigation take?
The litigation has been slow — slower than most claimants expected when the CLJA was passed in 2022. The DOJ has filed dozens of motions challenging causation, creating delay. But the four federal judges assigned to the litigation have been consistently ruling against the government and signaling that they want the bellwether cases moving toward trial. The first bellwether trials could happen in 2026. After the bellwether trials, the settlement framework for all remaining claims should become clearer — but no one can promise a specific timeline.
What diseases are linked to Camp Lejeune’s contaminated water?
The ATSDR/CDC has linked the contamination to birth defects, numerous types of cancer (including kidney cancer, liver cancer, bladder cancer, leukemia, breast cancer, lung cancer, and non-Hodgkin lymphoma), Parkinson’s disease, and lung disease. The specific contaminants in the water — TCE, PCE, benzene, and vinyl chloride — are known or probable human carcinogens. Benzene is classified as a Group 1 carcinogen by the International Agency for Research on Cancer.
How much is my Camp Lejeune claim worth?
The value range is extraordinarily wide — from approximately $200,000 on the low end (the DOJ elective option for qualifying claimants with shorter exposures and less severe diagnoses) to $5,000,000 or more on the high end (projected bellwether trial verdicts for catastrophic cases involving wrongful death or seven-figure medical expenses). The central variable is causation strength: your exposure duration, your disease category, your latency period, and the strength of the ATSDR-supported general causation for your specific illness. A claimant with documented long-term exposure, a diagnosis within an ATSDR-linked disease category, and a latency period consistent with the scientific literature has a strong case — and that case may be worth several times the elective-option offer.
Will I get a jury trial?
Currently, no. The CLJA proceedings are bench trials before four assigned federal judges in the Eastern District of North Carolina. Proposed federal legislation that would allow jury trials and redistribute some cases to other federal courts has been introduced in both the House and Senate but has not advanced out of committee. If the legislation passes, jury trials would become available — but until then, a federal judge, not a jury, will decide what the bellwether cases are worth.
What if my loved one died from a disease linked to Camp Lejeune water?
You may have a wrongful death claim under the CLJA framework. The DOJ’s elective option offers an additional $100,000 for cases of premature death — on top of the living-claimant amount. But a wrongful death case at trial may be worth far more than $550,000, particularly if the decedent was a young person (like a child who died of leukemia) or a wage earner whose lost financial support and lost companionship are significant. The CLJA’s interaction with North Carolina’s wrongful death and survival damages frameworks is one of the contested issues the bellwether trials may help resolve.
Do I need a lawyer for my Camp Lejeune claim?
You are not required to have a lawyer to accept an elective-option offer. But the difference between accepting the elective option and holding out for trial — or between an unrepresented claimant’s outcome and a represented claimant’s outcome — can be enormous. The DOJ has teams of government lawyers working to minimize what the government pays. The litigation involves complex causation science, federal procedural rules, and a statute that is still being interpreted by the courts. An attorney who understands toxic exposure litigation can evaluate your claim’s trial value, preserve your evidence, navigate the DOJ’s tactics, and hold the government accountable for what your case is actually worth — not what it unilaterally decided it is worth.
Why Attorney911
We are Attorney911 — The Manginello Law Firm, PLLC. We are Legal Emergency Lawyers. We handle toxic exposure and wrongful death cases, and we take cases in North Carolina working with local counsel where required. We do not claim an office in North Carolina. We do not invent credentials. We tell you who we are and what we can do.
Ralph P. Manginello is our Managing Partner — 27+ years of practice, licensed in Texas since November 6, 1998, admitted to the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas. He was a journalist before he was a lawyer, which means he knows how to find the story the documents tell — and in a toxic exposure case, the documents are the case. The water-quality testing records, the waste disposal files, the internal communications about what was known and when — those are the records that prove the government knew and did nothing. Ralph has spent his career in courtrooms, including federal court, and he does not take cases he cannot fight. You can read more about Ralph Manginello here.
Lupe Peña is our associate attorney — a former insurance-defense attorney who spent years inside a national defense firm, in the rooms where adjusters and their software decided how to deny, delay, and devalue people exactly like the CLJA claimants. Lupe knows the DOJ’s playbook because the tactics are the same ones private insurers use — lowball offers, delay through motions, contest causation, wear the claimant down. He uses that insider knowledge for injured clients now. He is fluent in Spanish and conducts full consultations in Spanish without an interpreter. You can read more about Lupe Peña here.
We work on contingency. That means we do not get paid unless we win your case. The fee is 33.33% before trial and 40% if the case goes to trial. Your first consultation is free. We have live staff available 24 hours a day, 7 days a week — not an answering service. When you call, you talk to a person.
Past results depend on the facts of each case and do not guarantee future outcomes. We do not promise a specific result. We promise that we will tell you the truth about what your case is worth, that we will fight for that value, and that if we are not the right fit for your case, we will tell you.
If you filed a Camp Lejeune claim and you are being told to accept a settlement that does not begin to cover what the government took from you, call us. The call is free. The consultation is free. And if we take your case, you pay nothing unless we win.
1-888-ATTY-911. Free consultation. No fee unless we win. Hablamos Español.