Two more track athletes allege Puma’s footwear technology caused career-altering injuries requiring surgery
The number of Puma sprinter injury lawsuits has grown to three after U.S. sprinter Champion Allison and Jamaican hurdler Damion Thomas Jr. filed separate suits against the German footwear brand on Tuesday, each claiming that design features in Puma’s shoes permanently damaged their feet. The filings come roughly a month after world champion sprinter Abby Steiner brought a similar case alleging Puma’s products ended her career.
What the sprinters allege in the Puma sprinter injury lawsuits
Both Allison and Thomas contend that Puma shoes incorporating carbon fiber plates and a foam compound called nitrofoam altered their biomechanics in ways that increased stress on their feet and Achilles tendons, ultimately leading to injuries that required surgical intervention. Allison states that his ability to compete at his prior level has been compromised, while Thomas says he can no longer perform at a professional or Olympic standard. Thomas has said publicly that learning of Steiner’s case was the first time he considered his injury might not have been simple bad luck.
The attorney representing all three athletes told Front Office Sports that after Steiner’s lawsuit became public, a significant number of runners and coaches who had worn Puma products reached out to his firm reporting comparable foot problems. Allison and Thomas were among those who came forward.
The product design at the center of the claims
The lawsuits center on Puma’s evoSpeed and Deviate Nitro product lines, though the specific models named differ between the two plaintiffs. The central argument is that combining rigid carbon fiber plates with the nitrofoam midsole shifts load-bearing forces in ways a responsible manufacturer should have identified and disclosed through adequate safety testing — and that athletes were not warned of those risks before wearing the shoes.
In April, following Steiner’s lawsuit, Puma denied that its products cause injuries and stated that it works closely with athletes to meet their needs. The company had not responded to requests for comment regarding the two new filings as of Tuesday. The plaintiffs’ attorney noted that Puma’s prior statement made no reference to safety evaluation or athlete disclosure.
What the athletes are seeking
Both Allison and Thomas are seeking financial and non-financial damages, including reimbursement for medical costs, lost career earnings, and what the suits describe as loss of full enjoyment of life. Their attorney has also said he hopes the litigation will prompt greater transparency around safety testing practices across the athletic footwear industry more broadly, pointing to at least one other ongoing case involving a different major shoe brand.
1stWhistle will continue to follow these cases as the legal proceedings develop and as Puma responds formally to the new complaints.