What’s actually slowing this PC down?
Pick the symptom - the matching free tool is one click away.
Yes. States have asked courts to intervene in Corteva’s planned transfer of its seed business to Vylor, arguing that moving assets could make it harder for PFAS claimants to recover. California filed a motion in its existing federal case in South Carolina; a separate coalition of 16 states and Guam filed a lawsuit in Indiana. The allegations are contested: the available announcements do not establish that either court granted the requested relief or that the transaction was designed to evade liabilities.
What the states are asking courts to do
The dispute centers on Corteva’s planned separation of its seed business into Vylor. The states’ concern is that assets could move to the new company while historical PFAS liabilities remain with Corteva, potentially limiting what claimants can recover. That is the states’ argument about the transaction’s possible effects, not a court finding that the transfer is unlawful or fraudulent.
California’s motion in South Carolina
On October 1, 2026, California Attorney General Rob Bonta announced that California had filed a motion in its existing PFAS lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the District of South Carolina. California asked the court to freeze Corteva’s assets and stop the planned separation. The state says the transfer could impair recovery for states and other claimants. Its announcement also says 16 states and the District of Columbia support the motion.
Bonta said, “Nobody can hide from the law.” That is an advocacy statement by California’s attorney general, not a judicial conclusion about Corteva or Vylor.
#1 Best Overall
The separate multistate case in Indiana
Separately, a coalition of 16 states and Guam filed a lawsuit in Indiana against EIDP, Corteva, and Vylor. EIDP is described in the states’ summaries as the company historically known as DuPont. The coalition seeks asset-preservation measures relating to the planned transfer.
This Indiana lawsuit is not California’s South Carolina motion. The state summaries available as of October 3, 2026, do not establish whether the Indiana court granted the requested measures or issued other orders. They also do not establish whether South Carolina granted California’s motion.
Rank #2
- Ideal for Gifting
- Ideal for a bookworm
- Compact for travelling
How the two proceedings differ
| Issue | California action | Multistate Indiana action |
|---|---|---|
| Court | U.S. District Court for the District of South Carolina | Indiana court, as identified in participating states’ summaries |
| Type of filing | Motion in California’s existing PFAS lawsuit | Separate lawsuit filed by 16 states and Guam |
| Entities and transaction | Corteva and its planned separation of the seed business to Vylor | EIDP, Corteva, and Vylor; the planned asset transfer |
| Relief described by the states | Freeze Corteva’s assets and stop the transaction | Asset-preservation measures |
| What is established about the outcome | The available announcement does not establish whether the motion was granted | The available state summaries do not establish whether relief was granted or other orders issued |
The coalitions should not be conflated: California’s announcement identifies 16 states and the District of Columbia supporting its motion, while the Indiana lawsuit is described as brought by 16 states and Guam.
What Corteva’s disclosure adds
Corteva’s Form 10-Q, filed July 31, 2026, describes litigation status through June 30, 2026. The company reported that 14 attorneys general had threatened actions to delay or prevent its intended separation until documentation about asset allocation and potential historical liabilities was provided. That disclosure records the company’s account of the dispute; it does not resolve the states’ allegations about the transaction.
The same filing reported that attorneys general in 31 states, the District of Columbia, and three U.S. territories had filed natural-resource-damage cases by June 30, 2026. Some cases name Corteva and include fraudulent-conveyance claims. This figure describes litigation reported by Corteva as of that date; it is not a count of rulings against the company.
Why earlier corporate separations are part of the dispute
The current challenges sit within a longer history of state claims about corporate transactions and environmental liabilities. In a separate complaint filed May 25, 2023, Rhode Island alleged that earlier DuPont transactions—including the 2015 Chemours spinoff and the Corteva separation—were part of a scheme to hinder creditors. The complaint also includes failure-to-warn and other claims. Those are allegations in another case, not findings that the earlier transactions were unlawful.
Rank #4
Chemours is relevant to that history because Rhode Island’s complaint alleges the 2015 spinoff transferred the performance-chemicals business along with environmental liabilities. The existence of the complaint does not establish the truth of that allegation or decide the claims now raised over Vylor.
Independent reader supportYour contribution helps us test, update, and keep practical guides available for everyone.What remains unresolved
- Whether either court will freeze assets, halt the planned separation, or grant other relief.
- Whether the transfer would leave claimants with inadequate access to assets or otherwise violate the law.
- How PFAS-related liabilities would ultimately be allocated after any corporate transaction.
- Whether a court will find fraudulent intent or liability on the part of Corteva, Vylor, or EIDP.
As of October 3, 2026, the state announcements and Corteva’s July filing establish that the transaction is contested and that PFAS litigation is extensive. They do not establish a finding of fraudulent intent, a ruling that the transfer is unlawful, or the final allocation of liabilities.
Do these 3 things before closing this tab:
1Repair Windows errors before they cause bigger problems2Fix the driver behind crashes, sound loss and screen glitches3Clear out junk files and repair common Windows errorsQuick Recap
Best Value
- It can be a gift option
- Comes with secure packaging
- Helpful in various ways
Product prices and availability are accurate as of the date/time indicated and are subject to change. Any price and availability information displayed on Amazon at the time of purchase will apply.
