Honeywell International Inc. has faced a steady stream of major lawsuits over the past decade, spanning breach of contract, product liability, foreign bribery, environmental contamination, asbestos indemnity, data privacy, and workplace discrimination. Several have produced nine- and ten-figure payouts. The summary below covers the most significant Honeywell lawsuits and settlements on the public record through mid-2026, organized by the type of dispute.
Flexjet Engine Maintenance Settlement
The largest recent payout grew out of a 2019 hourly-cost maintenance contract under which Flexjet LLC committed roughly 120 aircraft powered by Honeywell HTF turbofan engines to Honeywell’s service program and closed its own in-house engine shop.1Corporate Jet Investor. Ricci Relieved The contract fixed engine turnaround times at four to 30 days and set liquidated damages at $30,000 per day per engine for delays.2ch-aviation. US Flexjet Sues Honeywell for $1.2bn in Delay Damages
In October 2021, Honeywell invoked a force majeure clause and blamed COVID-19 supply chain disruptions. Flexjet called that a pretext, alleging Honeywell rarely had more than four rental engines available at any point between 2019 and 2023, grounding dozens of aircraft and pushing dispatch availability down to 64–74 percent against an industry norm of 82–85 percent.2ch-aviation. US Flexjet Sues Honeywell for $1.2bn in Delay Damages Flexjet sued in March 2023 in the New York Supreme Court’s Commercial Division, seeking up to $1.2 billion in liquidated damages.
In October 2025, the court rejected Honeywell’s force majeure defense and held the liquidated-damages clause enforceable. Honeywell disclosed a $470 million charge against fourth-quarter 2025 earnings and cut its adjusted profit forecast to $9.70–$9.80 per share from $10.60–$10.70.3Yahoo Finance. Honeywell Expects $470 Million Charge
On January 21, 2026, the parties announced a comprehensive settlement. Flexjet received $470 million in cash and $575 million in service credits, worth roughly $1.045 billion combined, and the engine maintenance agreement was extended through 2035. The deal also resolved related litigation brought by StandardAero and Duncan Aviation.4Honeywell Investor Relations. Honeywell and Flexjet Finalize Settlement, Renew Long-Term Agreement
Bombardier Engine Pricing Case
A parallel aviation dispute ran through the Canadian courts. Bombardier Inc. alleged that its contracts required Honeywell to offer the “best price” for HTF7000 turbofan engines used in Challenger business jets, and that Honeywell breached that obligation by selling comparable engines to Gulfstream and Textron for less. Bombardier sought about C$447 million (roughly US$318 million) for overpayments from 2012 to 2017, plus damages for later years.5Claims Journal. Bombardier, Honeywell Reach Settlement in Engine Price Lawsuit
In late 2023, the Quebec Superior Court ruled that Honeywell had an obligation to negotiate potential cost reductions with Bombardier. The Quebec Court of Appeal upheld that ruling in February 2024, and Honeywell sought leave to appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada.6Supreme Court of Canada. Honeywell International Inc. v. Bombardier Inc., Case 41196 Honeywell discontinued the application in December 2024 after the parties settled. The December 3, 2024 announcement created a new partnership on avionics, engines, and satellite communications technologies with up to $17 billion in potential revenue. Honeywell cut its fourth-quarter 2024 adjusted earnings outlook and lowered its sales forecast by $400 million as a result.5Claims Journal. Bombardier, Honeywell Reach Settlement in Engine Price Lawsuit
Air India Flight 171 Product Liability Suit
On June 12, 2025, Air India Flight 171, a Boeing 787-8 Dreamliner, crashed shortly after takeoff from Ahmedabad, killing 241 of 242 occupants and 19 people on the ground.7NPR. Air India Boeing 787 Crash Report India’s Aircraft Accident Investigation Bureau found that both engines’ fuel cutoff switches moved from “run” to “cutoff” about three seconds after liftoff, and only one engine relighted before the aircraft lost altitude.8AAIB Preliminary Report. Preliminary Report, VT-ANB
In September 2025, families of four passengers sued Boeing and Honeywell in Delaware Superior Court. The complaint targets Honeywell’s Model 4TL837-3D fuel cutoff switches, alleging the design or manufacture allowed a “pull-to-unlock” locking feature to be missing or disengaged, and that the switches sat in a “high traffic” zone of the throttle control quadrant.9ALM/Complaint Filing. Air India Flight 171 Complaint, Delaware Superior Court Boeing faces parallel allegations of negligent design and of failing to act on a 2018 FAA advisory bulletin about the same locking feature. The AAIB investigation remained open as of mid-2026, and no final cause has been determined.
Foreign Bribery Settlement Under the FCPA
In December 2022, Honeywell’s UOP subsidiary resolved parallel investigations by the U.S. Department of Justice, the SEC, and Brazilian authorities. According to the DOJ, between 2010 and 2014 Honeywell UOP conspired to offer roughly $4 million in bribes to a senior Petrobras executive to win a $425 million contract to design and build the “Premium” oil refinery, generating about $105.5 million in profits.10U.S. Department of Justice. Honeywell UOP to Pay Over $160 Million to Resolve Foreign Bribery Investigations
Honeywell UOP entered a three-year deferred prosecution agreement on charges of conspiracy to violate the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, paid a criminal penalty of about $79 million, forfeited roughly $106 million, and paid the SEC approximately $81 million in disgorgement and prejudgment interest. The total across all jurisdictions came to $202.7 million, and the SEC resolution also covered conduct involving an intermediary in Algeria in 2011.11Honeywell. Honeywell Settles Legacy Foreign Corrupt Practices Act Issues The parent company was not criminally charged, and no independent monitor was required. On July 8, 2025, the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas dismissed the criminal information against Honeywell UOP with prejudice, about five months before the DPA’s scheduled expiration.12JDSupra/Court Filing. Dismissal of Criminal Information, Honeywell UOP
Environmental Contamination Cases
Honeywell’s environmental exposure is among the broadest of any U.S. manufacturer, much of it inherited from predecessor companies including Allied Chemical, AlliedSignal, and Barrett Manufacturing. Since 2000, Honeywell entities have accumulated more than $164 million in environment-related penalties across 83 recorded cases.13Good Jobs First Violation Tracker. Honeywell International Violation Tracker
Onondaga Lake Superfund Cleanup
Onondaga Lake in Syracuse, New York, went on the federal Superfund National Priorities List in 1994 after decades of mercury and other hazardous discharges by Honeywell’s predecessors. Cleanup across 11 subsites has cost an estimated $451 million under a 2005 Record of Decision and a 2006 consent decree with the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation.14Onondaga Nation. The Cleanup Plan Work at the Wastebeds 1-8 and Wastebed B/Harbor Brook subsites finished by 2022, while remediation of the expanded Ley Creek area is now expected to start in spring 2027.15EPA. Onondaga Lake Superfund Site Cleanup Profile A separate 2017 consent decree valued at $26 million commits Honeywell to 20 habitat and water-quality restoration projects around the lake.16U.S. Department of Justice. Honeywell to Restore Onondaga Lake Natural Resources
Jersey City Chromium Sites
Honeywell predecessors ran chromate processing plants in Jersey City and Kearny, New Jersey, and toxic waste from those operations was sold as construction fill for decades. In 2005 the state sued Honeywell, PPG Industries, and Occidental Chemical over chromium contamination at scores of properties. A 2011 settlement had the three companies pay a combined $15 million to reimburse the state and accept responsibility for remediating 42 “orphan sites” plus continuing work at 126 identified sites.17New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection. DEP Settlement With Honeywell, PPG, and Occidental Chemical A separate 2010 residents’ class action produced a $10 million settlement fund, with roughly $1,850 estimated per eligible property.18NJ.com. $10 Million Honeywell Settlement for Jersey City Properties
Hoosick Falls PFOA Water Case
Residents of Hoosick Falls, New York, learned in 2014 that their municipal water and private wells contained PFOA, a chemical linked to kidney and testicular cancer. A class action named Saint-Gobain Performance Plastics, Honeywell, 3M, and DuPont. In 2021, Saint-Gobain, Honeywell, and 3M agreed to a $65.25 million partial settlement covering about 1,800 property owners along with medical monitoring and nuisance classes. U.S. District Senior Judge Lawrence E. Kahn approved the settlement in early 2022, calling it “fair, reasonable and adequate.”19Twin Cities Pioneer Press. Judge Approves $65M Settlement in Polluted Water Lawsuit Litigation against DuPont was not part of that settlement.20WAMC. Companies Agree to $65M Settlement Over Hoosick Falls PFAS Lawsuit
Other Environmental Matters
In 2013, Honeywell Resins and Chemicals LLC entered a consent decree over alleged Clean Air Act violations at its Hopewell, Virginia plant. The company paid a $3 million civil penalty and committed to about $66 million in air-pollution-control upgrades projected to cut nitrogen oxide emissions by roughly 6,260 tons per year.21U.S. Department of Justice. Honeywell Resins and Chemicals to Pay $3 Million Penalty, Upgrade Air Pollution Controls In 2020, New Jersey sued Honeywell over the Quanta Superfund site in Edgewater, where predecessors processed coal tar from the 1870s through the 1970s, leaving PCBs, heavy metals, and creosote. That state suit seeks natural resource damages beyond earlier federal consent decrees.22State of New Jersey Office of the Attorney General. NJDEP v. Honeywell International Inc., Complaint
Asbestos Indemnity and Spin-Off Disputes
For decades Honeywell carried mass tort liability from its Bendix automotive brake business, which made asbestos-containing products. When Honeywell spun off its transportation-systems unit as Garrett Motion Inc. in October 2018, Garrett was required to indemnify Honeywell for those legacy claims for 30 years, capped at $175 million a year and a maximum of $5.25 billion.23SEC EDGAR Filing. Garrett Motion Lawsuit Against Honeywell, December 2019 Garrett argued the terms were not negotiated at arm’s length, sued Honeywell in New York in December 2019, and filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy in September 2020, citing the indemnity as a severe operational constraint.24Business CCH/Second Circuit Opinion. Gabelli Asset Fund v. Garrett Motion Inc., Second Circuit
Garrett emerged from bankruptcy on April 30, 2021, under a plan that eliminated the asbestos indemnity and settled all litigation with Honeywell. Garrett paid $375 million in cash on exit and issued preferred stock with a present value of roughly $584 million, payable through 2030.25Garrett Motion Investor Relations. Garrett Motion Successfully Completes Chapter 11 Restructuring
A similar pattern followed with Resideo Technologies, spun off in 2018 with an indemnification and reimbursement agreement requiring payments of up to $140 million annually through 2043. In July 2025, Resideo made a one-time payment of $1.59 billion to Honeywell to extinguish all future obligations under that agreement.26Resideo Investor Relations. Resideo Announces Completion of Transaction With Honeywell
In October 2025, Honeywell announced it had divested all legacy Bendix and certain non-Bendix asbestos liabilities to Delticus, a corporate-liability acquisition platform. Honeywell and Delticus contributed roughly $1.68 billion in cash and insurance assets to the new structure, and Delticus assumed responsibility for administering all current and future asbestos-related claims. Honeywell reported no further financial exposure to these liabilities and projected annual free cash flow improvement of more than $100 million over the following several years.27Honeywell. Honeywell Announces Transaction to Divest Legacy Asbestos Liabilities
Data Breach Class Action Settlement
Honeywell discovered a cybersecurity incident in June 2023 involving a vulnerability in a third-party file-sharing tool. By August 2023 the company had determined that personal information was accessed and began notifying affected individuals. A class action, Curran v. Honeywell International Inc. (Case No. 24-CV-013793-590), followed in the Superior Court of North Carolina, Mecklenburg County.28Honeywell Data Settlement. Honeywell Data Breach Settlement
Without admitting wrongdoing, Honeywell agreed to reimburse class members up to $425 for documented out-of-pocket expenses, up to $82.50 for lost time, and up to $2,750 for extraordinary losses tied to identity theft. The deal also provided 24 months of Experian credit monitoring for those not previously enrolled.29Top Class Actions. Honeywell Data Breach Class Action Settlement The court granted final approval on November 6, 2024. The claim deadline was October 24, 2024, and the credit monitoring enrollment deadline was May 5, 2025. Both have passed; new claims can no longer be filed.28Honeywell Data Settlement. Honeywell Data Breach Settlement
Labor and Employment Actions
Honeywell has drawn about $41 million in labor relations penalties across 11 cases tracked since 2000, including a $5.6 million NLRB penalty in 2005 and larger legacy AlliedSignal-era settlements.13Good Jobs First Violation Tracker. Honeywell International Violation Tracker In March 2026, an NLRB administrative law judge ruled that Honeywell violated federal labor law by maintaining overly broad policies barring employees from disclosing confidential information or disparaging the company.30Law360. Honeywell Can’t Restrict Workers’ Speech, NLRB Judge Says
Also in 2026, former technician Antonio Deaner filed a discrimination and retaliation suit in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan. Deaner alleges he was passed over for overtime and special assignments because of his race, that a supervisor sent him a racial slur by text message, and that his internal complaints drew what he calls “sham” investigations. He also alleges Honeywell denied his disability accommodation requests and later terminated him under the pretext of a reduction in force. The case is in its earliest stages, and no findings have been made.31HC Magazine. Worker Sues Honeywell Alleging Racial Slur, Sham HR Investigations