As of March 2025, Monsanto has reached settlement agreements in nearly 100,000 Roundup lawsuits Bayer has accomplished this by negotiating block settlement arrangements with plaintiffs’ lawyers who have significant cases in the litigation… and by settling with plaintiffs before trial Although these settlements account for nearly two-thirds of all Roundup claims Monsanto estimates that 67,000 active Roundup lawsuits remain Most lawsuits have been filed in state court but over 4,000 claims in the MDL Roundup class action lawsuit are still pending in California New Roundup lawsuits continue to be filed regularly. Our attorneys receive daily calls and online contact forms from Roundup victims with NHL with 4,432 cases now pending in the federal MDL before Judge Vince Chhabria That is a very slight increase from 4,415 last month We have said this what feels like 1,000 times but most of the action remains in state court where recent verdicts have fueled continued interest in the glyphosate-cancer claims We think you will see more of these lawsuits settle as the year progresses North Dakota just handed pesticide manufacturers what they have been pushing for: legal protection from future failure-to-warn lawsuits tied to EPA-approved products like Roundup Governor Kelly Armstrong signed House Bill 1318 into law last week The new law makes it harder for individuals harmed by pesticides to bring claims in court if the product label complies with federal guidelines it becomes a shield against legal accountability which has spent years and millions of dollars trying to avoid courtroom losses tied to Roundup and its link to non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma they found a receptive audience in a small and the North Dakota Legislature chose to back big industry over the rights of their own constituents The outcome in North Dakota gives Bayer a headline What it does not give them is broad legal immunity We are seeing more Roundup NHL lawsuits filed in the MDL in April alleges that decades of using glyphosate-based herbicides caused his cancer diagnosed with non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma in 2022 filed suit against the manufacturer of Roundup claiming the product was defectively designed and inadequately labeled despite its widespread use across American agriculture The plaintiff regularly applied Roundup and other glyphosate-containing products on his property for years unaware of the potential carcinogenic risks The lawsuit claims that the manufacturer knew or should have known of these risks and failed to warn consumers despite mounting scientific and regulatory scrutiny The 2015 classification by the World Health Organization’s cancer research agency is central to the case which identified glyphosate as a probable human carcinogen The plaintiff asserts that safer alternative designs were available and that the defendant’s representations about the safety of Roundup were misleading and incomplete This case joins a broader wave of litigation seeking to hold Monsanto accountable for injuries tied to glyphosate exposure Another multi-plaintiff case is scheduled for June in Chicago Bayer is trying again to get the Supreme Court to block Roundup cancer lawsuits arguing that federal law trumps state warnings because the EPA doesn’t require a cancer label But the Supreme Court already rejected this same argument in 202 Just because the EPA has not acted does not mean Bayer is off the hook—state juries are still siding with plaintiffs and the chances of the court stepping in now are still pretty slim Only one new case was added to the Roundup MDL in March bringing the total number of pending cases to 4,415 That marks two straight months of almost no growth in the federal docket While the MDL continues to inch toward closure the real action in this litigation has shifted to state courts where trials produce massive verdicts and pressure Bayer to resolve the remaining claims a Georgia jury sent another loud and clear message to Bayer ordering the company to pay $2.1 billion to a plaintiff who developed non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma after using Roundup The staggering award includes $65 million in compensatory damages and an eye-watering $2 billion in punitive damages—a clear rebuke of Bayer’s continued refusal to take responsibility for the dangers of glyphosate Bayer has rolled out the same tired argument that the verdict contradicts scientific evidence and regulatory consensus—a line that it really has to retire The company will likely try to slash the damages on appeal where some original jury awards were reduced by 90% or more But the sheer size of this verdict underscores the risk Bayer continues to take by fighting these cases instead of settling them This is the latest major courtroom loss for Bayer Despite paying $10 billion to settle past claims the company still faces over 60,000 active lawsuits where juries have consistently delivered massive verdicts in favor of plaintiffs Bayer has set aside only $5.9 billion for future Roundup settlements—an amount that now looks laughably insufficient This verdict also comes at a critical time for Bayer which is losing in court and in the court of public opinion The company is already lobbying Congress for immunity from Roundup lawsuits warning lawmakers that it may withdraw the product from the U.S market if litigation costs continue to escalate But these hollow threats aren’t stopping juries from punishing Bayer for choosing to fight rather than fairly compensate victims With another multi-billion-dollar verdict on the books Bayer’s strategy looks increasingly reckless This case should serve as a wake-up call: if the company continues to gamble with jury trials A second request to centralize lawsuits against Monsanto and Bayer over Roundup exposure has been submitted to the New Jersey Supreme Court Plaintiffs in 36 cases across eight jurisdictions seek to consolidate their cases in Atlantic County Superior Court arguing that centralization would improve judicial efficiency with plaintiffs asserting that Roundup exposure led to serious health conditions The plaintiffs anticipate that if their request is approved the total number of cases could exceed 100 The New Jersey Supreme Court previously denied a similar request in June due to an insufficient number of cases maintaining that the number of claims does not justify multicounty litigation Bayer is telling Congress it may stop selling Roundup in the U.S Bayer is lobbying lawmakers for legal immunity arguing that federal EPA approval should block injured plaintiffs from suing under state laws and countless other individuals may have been harmed by prolonged exposure to Roundup Rather than taking responsibility for the devastating effects of glyphosate Bayer is doubling down on corporate defense strategies It has not yet made good on its veiled threat to pull Roundup from the U.S it will only be because litigation has made it too costly to continue profiting from a dangerous product Bayer is attempting to raise billions of dollars by seeking permission from its shareholders to issue additional stock This move highlights the significant financial challenges the company is facing due to the numerous lawsuits that remain pending The announcement caused Bayer’s stock to drop 10% making investors even more worried about the company’s future It hard to understand why this would tank the stock Bayer would have to find the money somewhere to fund settlements Zero cases were added to the Round MDL last month The total number of pending MDL cases remains at 4,414 The Roundup cancer MDL saw 14 new cases added over the last month bringing the total number of pending cases to 4,414 given the increasing shift of Roundup litigation to state courts where plaintiffs have seen significant successes in the last 18 months the relatively low number of new filings suggests that the MDL may be nearing its endgame with most activity now concentrated in state court dockets Monsanto has appealed a $175 million jury verdict in Pennsylvania Superior Court seeking to overturn the decision in favor of Ernest Caranci who claimed Roundup weedkiller caused his cancer Monsanto argues that a court clerk improperly coerced the jury into reaching a decision by suggesting they would have to return for several days of deliberation before a mistrial could be declared Monsanto asserts this instruction deviated from Pennsylvania’s standard guidance allegedly pressuring the jury to reach a verdict including the exclusion of evidence showing global scientific consensus on the safety of glyphosate coupled with the inclusion of a foreign report favoring the plaintiff created a double standard and undermined the fairness of the trial which preempts state law failure-to-warn claims The foundation of Monsanto’s appeal appears unsteady and unconvincing Lawyers are still filing lawsuits in the MDL The Roundup class action added 27 new cases during December There are now a total of 4,400 pending lawsuits in the MDL A recent study has revealed alarming connections between glyphosate exposure Researchers found that even after a six-month recovery period exacerbating inflammation and Alzheimer’s disease (AD)-like pathology Exposed mice exhibited an increase in amyloid plaques and elevated levels of inflammatory cytokines all hallmark features of neurodegenerative disorders like AD The study also highlighted heightened anxiety-like behaviors in glyphosate-exposed mice linking these to changes in the brain’s structure and chemistry caused by prolonged neuroinflammation This research is particularly concerning for Roundup users It underscores the potential for glyphosate to not only harm the body but also disrupt critical neurological processes Chronic exposure to glyphosate may amplify risks for developing neurodegenerative conditions by promoting inflammation For individuals already struggling with health complications related to glyphosate exposure this study provides additional evidence of its long-term dangers that go beyond non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma This is not the first study to come to these conclusions Monsanto will argue that the findings are limited to animal models and may not directly apply to humans But the literature on the persistence of glyphosate’s metabolite in brain tissue and its correlation with hallmark features of Alzheimer’s disease cannot be ignored The study is our all fours with a growing body of evidence linking glyphosate to inflammatory and neurodegenerative processes The plaintiffs filed a motion for mistrial following the defense’s blatant attempt to introduce an alcohol-related criminal charge involving the plaintiff arguing that it was entirely irrelevant to the case and served only to unfairly prejudice the jury This kind of evidence is so out of context that it becomes impossible to put the genie back in the bottle with a curative instruction Any law student who has taken an evidence class understands that such questioning is not admissible he was involved with the legal team representing Dewayne Johnson a former school groundskeeper who alleged that prolonged exposure to Roundup caused his non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma Johnson’s case is widely regarded as the starting point for this litigation finding that Monsanto acted with “malice and oppression” by failing to warn consumers about the potential health risks of its product If Kennedy is confirmed as Secretary of Health and Human Services his leadership could meaningfully influence the Roundup litigation he is likely to advocate for stricter oversight of herbicides and pesticides potentially pushing federal agencies like the EPA or FDA to re-evaluate the safety of glyphosate Any regulatory action questioning or limiting glyphosate’s use could strengthen plaintiffs’ claims supporting arguments that Roundup is hazardous and inadequately regulated Such a shift in regulatory and political climate—especially under a conservative administration—might force Bayer to do a reset on its jumbled legal strategy and reconsider a more aggressive pursuit of a global Roundup settlement Monsanto won the Womack trial in Philadelphia yesterday Good plaintiffs’ lawyers trying the case the last verdict was $78 million…it was a good recipe for victory But we are not going to win every trial in this litigation This was a tougher case with only ten residential uses of the product starting in 2015 A Massachusetts state court has found that federal law preempts a plaintiff’s claims that Monsanto failed to warn about the potential dangers of its weed killer but it is certainly a blow to lose the failure to warn claim The ruling mirrors the 3rd Circuit’s opinion in Schaffner v The concern is that this case provides judges who are inclined to favor corporate protection and we will likely see more opinions like this In a new ruling Friday, the Fifth Circuit upheld summary judgment in favor of Monsanto in a lawsuit filed by the family of a doctor who they claimed died of skin cancer due to exposure to Roundup There was a statute of limitations problem Louisiana has a draconian one-year deadline to file The court also excluded the family’s expert witness The expert’s reliance on a study showing arsenic in some Roundup bottles was criticized for failing to prove a direct link to the doctor’s exposure or provide sufficient evidence to support his cancer diagnosis I have no idea if skin cancer can be related to Roundup reproductive issues such as hormone disruption and fertility problems as well as liver and kidney damage observed in some animal studies Other potential health effects include respiratory irritation But it seems pretty unlikely that NHL is the only health complication these chemicals cause The jury in Melissen awarded $3 million in compensatory damages and $75 million in punitive damages the Third Circuit declined to revisit its decision that federal law preempts a more stringent Pennsylvania statute requiring cancer warnings on chemicals it upheld Monsanto’s victory in a case in which a man claimed the company’s Roundup herbicide caused his illness This leaves in place the court’s finding that the Federal Insecticide and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) expressly preempts any state law labeling requirements that differ from or add to FIFRA’s standards As discussed in the August 16 update below the EPA approved labels that did not include a cancer warning Since FIFRA requires health warnings on pesticide labels to match those approved by the EPA the court’s reasoning is that the state law’s requirement to include a cancer warning conflicts with federal regulations and is therefore preempted by federal law The court is on an island – no other courts have agreed and the prediction here is that we will get that momentum with a win in Melissen v which is still in trial in Philadelphia right now a Philadelphia jury cleared Monsanto of liability rejecting claims that its Roundup weedkiller caused the plaintiff’s non-Hodgkin lymphoma The jury found that the plaintiff did not provide sufficient evidence to prove that Roundup was the cause of his cancer Plaintiffs will not win every Roundup lawsuit in the five Roundup cases tried in Philadelphia The biggest verdict was $2.25 billion (later reduced to $404 million so we will use that number) while the two other wins included verdicts of $3.5 million and $175 million the average of these verdicts is approximately $194.17 million A Missouri appeals panel upheld a trial court victory for Monsanto Co The appeals court supported the trial court’s decision to exclude testimony from one of Moore’s experts The court said that the circuit court correctly excluded a witness who was not qualified as an expert the court found no error in not granting a mistrial based on Monsanto’s comments during its opening statement suggesting Moore would not present a medical doctor to testify about causation the court upheld the decision to deny Moore’s motion to strike a juror for cause affirming the juror’s ability to remain fair and impartial despite a past business relationship with Monsanto Will they take their momentum and try to start settling these lawsuits to save their company or will they double down and let the tide turn against them once again There are still 4,337 cases pending in the Roundup MDL in federal court This number has changed very little in over 3 years Monsanto has filed a motion to exclude the testimony of seven plaintiffs’ experts: Dr Plaintiffs’ filed their responses to these motions on Friday The 5th Philadelphia Roundup trial is underway in Young v Plaintiffs are looking to with their fourth trial in five tries in Philadelphia Bayer won a big victory in the 3rd Circuit yesterday. The court ruled that federal pesticide labeling regulations preempt state laws centers around whether the EPA approved pesticide labels which do not include cancer warnings for Roundup override state requirements for such warnings The court emphasized that once the EPA approves a label that omits specific health warnings state laws demanding those warnings are preempted by federal law Chagares wrote that “Because regulations promulgated to implement FIFRA require the health warnings on a pesticide’s label to conform to the proposed label approved by the EPA during the registration process and because during Roundup’s registration process the EPA approved proposed labels omitting a cancer warning following an extensive review of scientific evidence concerning Roundup’s possible carcinogenicity we conclude that the alleged state-law duty to include the Cancer Warning on Roundup’s label imposes requirements that are different from those imposed under FIFRA and that it is therefore preempted by FIFRA.” I don’t think Bayer’s fantasy of this going to the U.S But we do now have a split among federal appellate courts over the issue of federal preemption of state warning requirements on pesticides it is more realistic today than it was before this opinion Bayer stock is up 10% this morning on the news Plaintiff won a big appeal of a jury verdict in Oregon The plaintiff contended that the trial court erred by excluding testimony from his expert Benbrook was prepared to explain the overall regulatory framework for pesticides in the United States including the processes and criteria the EPA uses to evaluate and approve pesticide products This would encompass the complexities of FIFRA how the EPA assesses the safety and efficacy of pesticides and the significance of the EPA’s labeling requirements His testimony was also expected to shed light on how different pesticide regulations interact particularly focusing on the EPA’s pesticide cancer risk assessment process and policy This would involve discussing how the EPA and other regulatory bodies like the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) reach different conclusions regarding the carcinogenicity of substances like glyphosate The Oregon intermediate appellate court agreed was a mistake not to allow Dr the appellate court reversed the judgment and remanded the case arguing that the plaintiff’s claims were preempted by the Federal Insecticide that the FIFRA does not preempt the plaintiff’s state law claims The appellate court specifically found that FIFRA’s express and implied preemption did not apply a motion for a new trial after plaintiffs’ loss in Kline was rejected this week This is plaintiffs’ only loss in Philadelphia Plaintiffs are three for four with three substantial verdicts totaling $3.5 million We think the trial court incorrectly restricted evidence regarding the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC)’s classification of glyphosate as a probable human carcinogen and a ruling by the U.S which highlighted issues with an EPA study on glyphosate We know these have been strong arguments for jurors in other cases But you do not expect the trial judge to reverse course This argument will get a fresh look on appeal it seems Judge Chhabra’s concern about plaintiffs’ Roundup lawyers taking on too many cases we talked about in the June 7 update was not an idle remark He asked that the parties file a joint case management statement on a number of issues including how to “determine if plaintiffs’ counsel are taking on more cases than they can effectively litigate.” The House Appropriations Committee recently cast their votes on the Fiscal Year 2025 Interior a critical piece of legislation we highlighted in our June 29 update A significant component of this bill is the inclusion of FIFRA preemption language which would grant substantial protections to Bayer in ongoing and future lawsuits related to their products and Rodenticide Act) preemption would limit the ability of plaintiffs to pursue certain types of claims at the state level effectively shielding Bayer from some legal liabilities that could arise from allegations of product-related harms all Democrats on the committee voted against the bill citing concerns over corporate protections and the potential undermining of state-level regulatory efforts supporting the measures as necessary for maintaining industry stability and protecting businesses from what they perceive as overreaching litigation risks This unanimous split underscores the deep ideological divisions surrounding regulatory and legal protections for large corporations like Bayer I remain skeptical about the bill’s prospects of advancing through the entire House of Representatives Given the current political climate and the strong opposition from Democratic members it is unlikely that the bill will garner the necessary bipartisan support required to pass the full House the bill faces formidable challenges in the Senate where similar partisan dynamics are expected to play out and you need 60 votes in the Senate has been voluntarily dismissed by the plaintiff The trial judge dismissed nine of the ten counts alleged in the cases ruling that the plaintiffs had missed the statute of limitations the plaintiff voluntarily dismissed the claim What happened was the plaintiff was diagnosed with NHL in 2014 and tragically died in April 2020 The wrongful death claim his family filed was filed within the statute of limitations The fact that the victim’s doctors did not know Roundup could cause cancer that the man continued to use Roundup after his diagnosis and that he may have had some dementia did not persuade the judge It is sad that the family will not get the courtroom justice they deserve but this dismissal has nothing to do with the merits of the case There will be another Roundup trial in Philadelphia next month the House Appropriations Subcommittee on Interior and Related Agencies voted on the fiscal year 2025 appropriations bill which includes preemption language that would strip states of the ability to regulate pesticides hindering victims’ ability to hold pesticide manufacturers accountable Getting past a bill past a subcommittee is a long way to passing it but it is not good that Bayer is making some inroads with this nonsense we reported that the trial judge ruled that the $2.25 billion Roundup verdict was excessive and the award was reducing the award to $404 million Judge Susan Schulman put out a 75-page opinion explaining the court’s reasoning The judge says the original compensatory damages exceeded reasonable compensation given that the plaintiff did not claim economic loss or seek a specific amount of damages The court also found the punitive damages excessive in relation to the compensatory damages adjusting them to seven times the revised compensatory award Juries are entrusted to assess the evidence and deliver verdicts that reflect the community’s sense of justice The judge has effectively overridden the jury’s judgment by slashing the compensatory and punitive damages awarded to the plaintiff Would the judge have increased the award to that number if the jury awarded $5 million in this exact case But none of this matters in the big picture $404 million is almost equally impactful to the plaintiff’s life and it does not change the message the jury sent to Monsanto (not that it is necessarily listening) Many are speculating Bayer may try a Texas Two-Step bankruptcy This process would involve Bayer creating a new subsidiary to which it transfers all Roundup-related liabilities effectively isolating the parent company from the litigation claims But that just kicks the can down the road But Bayer might try this if if feels like it has a shot in Congress (See the update below and the July 29 update above.) Bayer has been spending a lot of money lobbying Congress to pass legislation to pass a law to limit Roundup lawsuits This effort includes a provision in the farm bill which would limit the ability of plaintiffs to claim they were uninformed about the herbicide’s health risks they are also targeting state legislatures as well this legislation would significantly reduce Bayer’s legal liabilities and prevent future lawsuits This is scary because it is hard to trust Congress Bayer’s bet the company strategies all seem to revolve around pipe dreams like “Congress will pass a law” or “the Supreme Court will change its thinking.” The New Jersey Supreme Court has denied the request to designate litigation against Monsanto Co. and Bayer AG as multicounty litigation. This decision was announced in a notice to the bar published on Monday The court determined that the current number of cases did not justify a multiple-county litigation designation all cases involving Roundup will continue to be filed in the appropriate counties of venue This is not a big deal one way or the other The Roundup MDL judge raised concerns that some plaintiffs’ firms might be taking on too many cases just to settle them inexpensively The judge questioned whether some firms might be neglecting clients by taking on more cases than they can handle and settling them for minimal amounts instead of litigating a small minority of lawyers take cases that are not viable either because they want a large inventory of cases or they simply cannot identify which claims should be pursued The Roundup litigation is a little ripe for this because we have big verdicts and settlements which attract lawyers like moths to a flame I do not think it is a big problem in this litigation defense lawyers have the solution to this problem in their hands: do not settle claims if they do not think the claims are compensable A Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas judge has reduced the verdict in McKivision from January from $2.25 billion to $400 million I think the jury’s verdict should be respected But we can all agree that $400 million is still an extremely large sum of money Bayer AG Chief Executive Officer Bill Anderson has described the ongoing wave of Roundup lawsuits over the widely used weedkiller Roundup as an “existential threat” to the company Speaking at the Executives’ Club of Chicago Anderson emphasized the dire nature of the litigation threat admitting that the glyphosate litigation threatens Bayer’s ability to survive and innovate for farmers that Monsanto makes a lot of other quality products These two things can be true at the same time I think it is an existential threat not because it is not a situation that can be controlled It is because Bayer will not do what it knows it must to resolve this litigation it will have to take some lumps and pay a lot of money in settlements But isn’t that better than going bankrupt Circuit Court of Appeals yesterday decided against revisiting a February decision in Carson v Monsanto that dismissed arguments suggesting the Federal Insecticide Fungicide and Rodenticide Act precluded a Georgia plaintiff from claiming that the company failed to inform customers about the health risks associated with Roundup The first part of Bayer’s “Five Point Plan” to defend Roundup lawsuits is to get the Supreme Court to rule in its favor The idea was to win Carson to get a split in the circuits which might interest the Supreme Court into taking the appeal That “dream scenario” for Bayer as a path out of the litigation nightmare it is in looking bleak Monsanto’s theory that FIFRA preempts failure to warn claims is just not selling with anyone outside of Bayer’s lawyers a new Roundup lawsuit was filed by a professional arborist who has extensively used Roundup herbicide for over two decades in his line of work He applied Roundup on various properties to clear out undesirable turf and weeds preparing areas for new turf and maintaining flower beds around trees He not only used the herbicide for his clients but also on his own property His primary choice was Roundup concentrate which he mixed with water and sprayed using handheld and backpack sprayers regularly exposing his skin to the chemical the arborist was diagnosed with Cutaneous T Cell Lymphoma he has endured significant and disabling physical injuries resulting from both the disease and its treatments with his children also deeply affected by his condition The family was initially puzzled by the diagnosis given his young age and lack of family history with the disease They later discovered that his prolonged exposure to Roundup was likely the cause of his cancer This lawsuit adds to a growing docket of Roundup-related lawsuits being filed in Delaware state court A judge knocked back the $1.56 billion jury verdict in state court in Missouri to three plaintiffs in November last year to $611 million But let’s all agree a $611 million verdict is a darn good verdict The Iowa Senate approved a bill that provides legal immunity to agricultural chemical manufacturers from lawsuits alleging the companies did not inform users about the health risks provided the products include the necessary EPA labels This is Iowa Senate selling out its own citizens right to a jury trial presumably in exchange for some campaign contributions It is unknown how the Iowa House will deal with this bill We got a call a few hours ago from a new client diagnosed with NHL in 2024 This one individual tragedy of many reminds us all how this particular litigation works there is a latency period between the time of exposure to Roundup and the onset of non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma This means that after someone is exposed to Roundup it could take several years before symptoms of non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma manifest The latency period is the result of the time required for the exposure to Roundup to initiate changes or damage in the body’s cells which eventually can lead to the development of NHL and other forms of cancer So if Bayer stops selling Roundup today – see the March 19 update below – we will still be seeing new claims for the next 10 years But discontinuing the product or putting a warning on it would at least start the clock on the end of any Roundup litigation Plaintiff is appealing the defense verdict in Kline v the one defeat we have suffered in Philadelphia Bayer officials announced they are exploring a potential alternative to glyphosate which is associated with a heightened risk of non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma and has resulted in significant legal challenges for the company This move to find a substitute for glyphosate is viewed by many as an indirect way of recalling Roundup effectively withdrawing the controversial ingredient implicated by numerous plaintiffs in causing their cancer from the market Keeping Roundup on the market as it is now complicates Monsanto’s settlement process would be a great move toward mitigating these legal and public relations challenges By developing and marketing a glyphosate-free alternative Monsanto can demonstrate a commitment to safety and a willingness to address the concerns that have led to endless lawsuits and billions in settlements and verdicts This shift could potentially reduce the company’s legal liabilities and facilitate a more straightforward path to settling existing lawsuits Bayer planted an article in Bloomberg that appeared yesterday from anonymous sources that it is considering the Texas Two-Step bankruptcy This strategy is named after a Texas law that allows corporations to divide their assets and liabilities then push the liability-heavy unit into bankruptcy as a means to negotiate a comprehensive settlement It does not work in mass torts with solvent companies as 3M Co and Johnson & Johnson learned just last year in the two biggest mass torts in the country The article points out that experts say the chances of success with the Texas Two-Step are doubtful and it signals Bayer’s desperation So what is the thinking here and why leak it to Bloomberg The one thing even a failed Texas Two-Step would do is temporarily slow things down Plaintiffs and plaintiffs’ lawyers sense that Roundup settlement is not that far away Plaintiffs want their money for obvious reasons They have suffered horribly and justice has already been long delayed for most victims Plaintiffs’ lawyers have a more nuanced reason to want a settlement sooner rather than later plaintiffs’ lawyers often finance the acquisition and handling of personal injury cases with mountains of debt These attorneys do not want delay and Bayer knows it this threat targets these lawyers to give them a little extra incentive to be flexible in settlement negotiations if you are looking for a tea leaf for a Monsanto Roundup settlement in 2024 I had higher hopes for the four cases that were in trial I never understood the facts of Meyer and do not know whether it was a good case There is no question Bayer will keep looking to try weak cases But you also will see more billion dollar verdicts if this litigation drags on This is from Bayer’s CEO on the earnings call this week: But it’s clear that a strategy of defense alone is not enough We’re looking at the litigation topic from every angle That includes much more thorough engagement with other stakeholders in the realm of public policy It includes considering every possible means to bring closure to these lawsuits for the company and for our customers Bayer is being cagey and its plans for two reasons it is a bad idea to telegraphic your intentions in how you will manage any piece of mass tort litigation But I also don’t think it has a clear plan either 2024 – More on Kline Verdict in Philadelphia Let’s take a closer look at the Kline case I’ll admit I was surprised by this verdict Kline filed a lawsuit against Monsanto and Nouryon Chemicals LLC in March 2022 alleging that his regular use of the weed killer Roundup caused him to develop non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma Kline claimed that he had been using Roundup regularly for six months out of the year for several years before his NHL diagnosis This case was not a particularly close call for the jury They were out for only two hours before returning with a defense verdict The plaintiff will appeal because evidence about the Environmental Protection Agency’s safety evaluation of Roundup being vacated and the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) findings that Roundup is a carcinogen were not allowed to be presented at trial the plaintiff will appeal evidentiary issues You do not see any statements about unfair and biased judges like you see from Monsanto This Monsanto victory lowers the average Roundup verdict in Pennsylvania to $607 million Monsanto; it’s its first win in Philadelphia The Roundup wrongful death trial in Delaware (Cloud v the jury advised the judge that they were deadlocked Another Roundup trial in Arkansas ended last week in a defense verdict in Cody v Not every case of NHL was caused by Roundup I’m not that familiar with Cody besides what I read in the Complaint (which did indicate the plaintiff used a great deal of the product) But we will run some updated average verdict statistics later in the week My prediction is we get another huge verdict in March Plaintiffs’ Roundup NHL lawyers are looking for paths to organize the litigation better This involves having an orderly process to administer these cases like we have So attorneys have submitted a petition to the Administrative Director of Courts in New Jersey requesting that all Roundup-related lawsuits filed in the state which allege a connection to non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma be grouped into what is called in New Jersey Multi-County Litigation Should the cases be consolidated under a single judge this state-court mechanism would mirror the federal MDL approach although hopefully at a faster pace than the California MDL The presiding judge would oversee the discovery process on universally applicable issues and likely set up a “bellwether” trial system We should get a verdict today and we will report it here We should get a verdict in the Cloud case in Delaware This is a wrongful death case filed by the family of a South Carolina man Plaintiffs’ attorneys are asking the jury for $142 million in punitive damages The bar for punitive damages in Delaware is high – conduct that is willful or wanton shows reckless indifference to the rights of others or is otherwise in egregious violation of societal rights or standards But many juries have awarded billions of dollars in punitive damages in Roundup NHL lawsuits using a similar standard So certainly evidence of economic bullying covertly attacking scientific research it didn’t like remorselessness… there are all things from which a reasonable jury in Cloud may conclude that Monsanto recklessly violated the public trust and should be punished California judge has significantly reduced a jury award in Dennis the case of a former land surveyor who attributed his cancer to Monsanto’s Roundup product Judge Kevin Enright declined Monsanto’s request for a retrial of Michael Dennis’ lawsuit but considered the punitive damages of $325 million to be excessive in relation to the $7 million in compensatory damages and thus in violation of due process according to standards set by the U.S That is what a win for Bayer is in 2024 – a $28 million verdict with more to come A Philadelphia judge increased a $175 million verdict against Bayer AG’s Monsanto to approximately $177.3 million by adding $2.3 million in delay damages to the compensation for Ernest Caranci the rate of prejudgment interest in personal injury lawsuits like this is 6% This rate is applied to the amount awarded from the time the action commenced until the judgment is rendered The judge also dismissed Monsanto’s request for a new trial countering the company’s usual argument in these cases that the judge was biased and irrational (and that the plaintiff was too old to receive so much compensation) Here is the money quote that summarizes everything I’ve been saying: “Aggressively blaming the court and plaintiff’s counsel for the outcome as opposed to the ineffectiveness of defendant’s trial tactics cross examinations or proffered defense evidence outcome is hardly a compelling basis for the court to overturn this jury’s decision.” Everyone smells blood in the water with Roundup and it is drawing lawyers who do not have personal injury or wrongful death lawsuits The MDL judge in California signaled his inclination to either dismiss a proposed nationwide class action lawsuit regarding Roundup exposure or transfer it to a multidistrict litigation in California’s Central District expressed concerns during a San Francisco hearing about the suit being filed in an inappropriate venue have their principal places of business outside Northern California and the plaintiffs lack a direct connection to the Northern District of California initiated in September by five Californian plaintiffs seeks to represent individuals nationwide who have been exposed to Roundup more than twice yearly raising issues about the suitability of the Northern California venue and the representativeness and manageability of such a broad class action given the diversity of state laws I would rather everyone focus on the Roundup wrongful death and personal injury claims because that matters a whole lot more than trying to get back 11 bucks to someone who bought Roundup and does not have NHL We used to have a long wait in between Roundup trials A series of NHL Roundup lawsuits are gearing up for trial in Arkansas We also have the Cloud trial is progress in Delaware in Conway County Circuit Court in Morrilton the plaintiff alleges his wife’s death from NHL was from Roundup exposure This is the first Roundup pesticide trial in Arkansas Sonoma County Superior Court is preparing for the 7th Roundup trial in California in Myers v we get another Philadelphia trial where plaintiffs are 3-0 Postal Service worker alleges that his aggressive cancer is linked to his use of a self-mixed Roundup variant This trial starts today in the Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas I may be an optimist but I predict you will see a lot of Roundup settlements in the first half of 2024 Because Monsanto cannot continue to bear this trial schedule and the likely verdicts we will see in most of these lawsuits The left-for-dead Roundup litigation is back and getting tons of attention in 2024 We learned today that someone is calling potential victims in California and telling them they are entitled to $40,000 in compensation it is likely worth a heck of a lot more than $40,000.) Monsanto is challenging the $2.25 billion verdict claiming a series of mistakes by a Philadelphia judge unfairly influenced the trial’s outcome the motion called the court’s rulings “inexplicable.” It is hard to understand who the target audience is – other than themselves – with this kind of rhetoric Monsanto in Delaware Superior Court in a lawsuit involving a South Carolina groundskeeper whose family’s wrongful death lawsuit alleges that Monsanto’s Roundup was the cause of his non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma it is hard not to have high hopes for this case and juries have awarded victims over $4 billion in the last few months These are among the best cases because of the undeniable volume of exposure to the product We do not have an exact answer to how much exposure to Roundup is dangerous we talked about Bayer’s ‘bet the company” strategy on a favorable appellate court ruling That strategy took a punch to the face today The 11th Circuit ruled that a state failure-to-warn claim filed by a Roundup user who alleges his cancer was caused by Monsanto Co.’s weedkiller is not barred by federal law regulating pesticide labels The court found that Georgia’s state-law duty to warn of foreseeable dangers which manufacturers should reasonably know about aligns with federal law and does not demand more from pesticide manufacturers than the Federal Insecticide Bayer put a lot of eggs in the basket of this case In one of the goofiest moves in recent appellate history it settled with the plaintiff and then paid him to make this appeal to make favorable law But if you are a Bayer executive reading this you have to consider the possibility that your lawyers have steered you in the wrong direction in this litigation You are not the first corporate executives to get burned listening to your attorneys But you must do what is hard now to save this company from ruins This means finding the cash to get these cases settled once and for all and doing it quickly New Jersey might become a new hotbed jurisdiction for Roundup cancer lawsuits The state’s Administrative Office of the Courts announced plans to gather public opinions on a proposal to coordinate a group of Roundup trials in Atlantic County Superior Court The request for this coordination aims to bring together 10 Roundup cases filed since late December and we have seen this movie before in other mass torts you can expect hundreds of cases to follow which should keep lawsuits filed in New Jersey in state court It is easy to forget the Roundup MDL with so many trials in state court But 26 new Monsanto lawsuits were filed in the MDL last month In one new lawsuit filed yesterday in the MDL brings a wrongful death lawsuit as the representative of the estate of a deceased relative The plaintiff claims the decedent used Roundup regularly since approximately 1980 adhering to all safety and precautionary warnings provided during its use the man was diagnosed with Diffuse Large B-cell lymphoma It is alleged that the plaintiff’s condition was directly and proximately caused by exposure to Roundup products manufactured by the defendant Reuters has a quote that I think is really on point: This is the updated scorecard of Roundup verdicts: The average payout for the last six Roundup lawsuits that went to trial The verdict is back in McKivision: $2.25 billion The jury awarded $250 million in compensatory damages and $2 billion in punitive damages Half of the 12 jurors were college-educated Plaintiffs’ arguments are working in front of men Whoever did the focus groups for Bayer and told their lawyers to shoot for an educated jury should be fired Bayer should change the warning on Roundup today and do what it did last time – start settling cases with lawyers with the largest number of cases But this may be the verdict that turns the tide Losing five trials in a row makes you want to try a new path Its lawyers tried – pushing the envelope like it pathologically does – to convert a fact witness into an expert witness This did not please the plaintiff’s attorneys or Judge Susan I One leitmotif in these comments is my complaint that Monsanto Judge James Crumlish III of the Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas seems to agree He sternly opposed Monsanto’s attempt to remove him from the case after a $175 million verdict as a transparent and manipulative tactic He said the company’s goal is not to contest the trial’s evidence but to undermine the jury and the trial judge He described Monsanto’s efforts as a delay tactic and a cynical diversion Monsanto has previously attempted to disqualify judges in other cases These efforts include a failed attempt to disqualify a California judge and accusations of favoritism against another Philadelphia judge after a $3.5 million verdict Monsanto is the litigation version of politics in 2024 it must be because you are acting in bad faith A rational defendant in Monsanto’s shoes right now would be doing everything it could to settle these lawsuits But stuff like this makes you wonder if the company is rational about this litigation I say the company… but maybe it is their outside lawyers I’m not sure who is driving this train But the adults in the room need to step up Plaintiffs’ lawyers will advance the themes that have been working: Roundup causes non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma and Monsanto hid studies that show the association to sell more product employing it multiple times annually for several consecutive years His approximation suggests that he utilized Roundup on at least 30 occasions before the cancer manifested You never know what will happen in a jury trial But the odds seem very strong that plaintiffs make it 3-0 I’ve been saying Bayer needs to settle this case It needs breathing room to figure out how to fashion a global settlement or at least one that meaningfully reduces the number of Roundup lawsuits it faces A new study has revealed significant effects of glyphosate on the gut microbiome The research demonstrates that low levels of glyphosate can disrupt gut microbiota by reducing beneficial bacteria which play crucial roles in maintaining gut health The study highlights gut dysbiosis as a potential mechanism through which glyphosate could negatively affect human health raising concerns about its safety at doses previously considered acceptable These findings contribute to the growing body of evidence questioning the long-term safety of glyphosate especially in relation to its impact on human gut health Plaintiffs five trial streak was snapped on Friday when a San Benito County California jury found no liability in Jones v We know plaintiffs will not win every case We have a fresh slate of trials in January including an extensive trial in Philadelphia where plaintiffs are two-for-two One theme in the comments is my frustration at how Monsanto blames the judge whenever it loses a case every appeal is premised on the trial judge’s error But Monsanto often goes beyond simple error and argues some nefarious motive Monsanto accused Judge Genece Brinkley of the Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas of exhibiting favoritism towards the plaintiff during the trial Monsanto claimed that Judge Brinkley made prejudicial statements and asked questions during witness testimonies that seemed to align with the plaintiff’s side Bayer is not just mishandling litigation in the Roundup NHL lawsuits Bayer was ordered on Monday to pay $857 million to ex-students and parent helpers at a school near Seattle — their exposure to the firm’s dangerous chemicals at the facility which they claimed led to brain injuries and various health issues Bayer’s stock price is feeling the consequences served as Monsanto’s key expert in defending their Roundup weed killer against lawsuits alleging it caused cancer His central claim: most non-Hodgkin lymphoma cases the specific type of cancer in these lawsuits are simply unfortunate accidents of biology caused by random mutations rather than environmental factors like Roundup That is the Monsanto’s favorite argument plaintiffs’ verdicts totaling over $2 billion suggests that argument is wearing thin Plaintiffs’ Monsanto weed killer lawyers are highlighting to juries concerns about the methodology and data underlying Dr pointing to 54 published articles that disagree with his assertion that 95% of NHL is just pulling the wrong genetic straw Tomasetti’s “bad luck” theory improperly minimizes environmental factors in cancer development They believed that allowing Tomasetti to continue to present this data that lacks a study scientific basis should be excluded from court proceedings Judge Chhabria will decide whether to allow Tomasetti to testify in the next group of Roundup trials in the MDL plaintiffs may be better off letting Tomasetti testify and destroying him on cross-examination than excluding him from testifying The mess Bayer has made is starting to get more attention in the media another Philadelphia jury ordered Bayer to pay nearly $3.5 million to a woman who alleged that the company’s Roundup weedkiller caused her cancer reached after a three-week trial and two days of jury deliberation comprised $462,500 in compensatory damages and $3 million in punitive damages This verdict represents Bayer’s fifth consecutive loss There is another trial in Philadelphia next month I predict that the verdict will be more than $3.5 million juries awarded victims a few thousand dollars shy of $4.5 billion the average Roundup verdict is $300 million If you multiply $300 million by the estimated 40,000 remaining cases (This is a little misleading because of trials with multiple plaintiffs Bayer CEO Bill Anderson has a degree from MIT and has had great success as a CEO in his two previous pharmaceutical company stints He pledged to study the company before taking action Because that train of success will come to a screeching halt if he does not find a way to settle the Roundup lawsuits In a verdict that truly redefines this litigation a Missouri jury ordered Monsanto on Friday to pay over $1.5 billion in damages to three former users of its Roundup weedkiller who claimed the product caused their non-Hodgkin’s lymphomas awarded the plaintiffs a combined $61.1 million in actual damages and $500 million each in punitive damages and Daniel Anderson from California were the plaintiffs in the lawsuit All three were diagnosed with non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma The jury determined that Monsanto was responsible for their injuries due to not providing sufficient warnings about the dangers of Roundup These last four verdicts will almost certainly have an outsized impact on Roundup settlement amounts This is going from bad to worse to – I’ll say it again We will get another verdict in Philadelphia in Martel v That message came out of a media call after Bayer’s third-quarter financial results were released Bayer says they will keep defending Roundup litigation cases asserting to juries that the herbicide is safe when used as instructed said something else interesting: “We have no appetite to write humongous checks and in a time where we have little free cash flow.” My plan for those parking tickets was to put them in my glovebox and try to forget about them But this is precisely what I did in college Monsanto is seeking to overturn a $175 million verdict from a Pennsylvania state court trial contending that the court unjustly influenced the jury to resolve a deadlock in a case regarding its alleged failure to warn about carcinogenic risks in Roundup Monsanto’s brief accuses the court of several errors including coercing the jury towards a consensus without informing the parties and allowing prejudicial evidence from the plaintiffs The company allegedly discovered post-verdict that the jury was initially deadlocked at 9-3 and the court had instructed them to either reach a majority or face extended deliberation Monsanto also criticized the court’s exclusion of evidence from regulators regarding the safety of glyphosate Bayer also may be declaring war on the entire mass tort process in Philadelphia Crumlish III’s recusal from any rulings on the motion for a new trial due to these grievances There is no real point to this – the judge is not going to recuse – other than to attack the judge and the process Bayer got a win today when the Ninth Circuit ruled that California’s mandate for products containing glyphosate to carry a warning label is unconstitutional infringing upon agricultural producers’ First Amendment rights against compelled speech The court found that the warning made producers convey a message they fundamentally disagree with concerning a matter that it thinks is not settled among the scientific community The requirement failed the “intermediate scrutiny” standard because it was not narrowly tailored to serve an important government interest despite the International Agency for Research on Cancer classifying glyphosate as “probably carcinogenic” five years ago As for whether it serves an important government interest… if California does not have an important government interest in keeping its citizens alive it is hard to figure out where it does have a significant governmental interest believing the lower court should review the sufficiency of the new warning and arguing that scientific consensus should not be a requirement for noncontroversial information in the context of compelled commercial speech My guess is the Supreme Court will see it the same way Philadelphia is gearing up for its second trial concerning allegations that the herbicide Roundup causes cancer Nouryon Chemicals will be the first time Pennsylvania-based chemical manufacturer Plaintiffs allege that Nouryon supplied Monsanto with chemicals that increased Roundup’s carcinogenic potential This is also the defendant that gets these claims in state court in Pennsylvania in the first place We will have many Roundup litigation updates in the future and we will see more trials in Missouri and California state courts Bayer is worth $44 billion (which is much less than it paid for Monsanto) Bayer absorbed two verdicts against Monsanto totaling over $500 million which make up .005% of the estimated pending Roundup claims against Monsanto were over 1% of the total value of the entire company My point is Bayer can still settle these lawsuits at a number that does not decapitate the company But we are no longer in an MDL where trial dates move slowly The state court docket is producing more and more trials things could spiral out of control pretty quickly Bayer has to acknowledge that its playbook in this litigation is not working I complimented many times Bayer’s strategy of letting the weakest cases go to trial and quell the enthusiasm of plaintiffs lawyers I figured the point was to leverage settle out as many cases as they could before the Philadelphia trials began My guess is Bayer began to believe the were winning because their lawyers found the secret sauce to win as opposed to crediting it strategy of trying cases with weak facts for plaintiffs The Legal Intelligencer correctly reports that plaintiffs’ Roundup attorneys are ramping up the pressure on Bayer to resolve numerous lawsuits or remove its Roundup pesticide from the market after three substantial verdicts amounting to over half a billion dollars were awarded against Monsanto and California totaling over $500 million has changed the landscape Plaintiffs’ lawyers want fair Roundup settlement offers and “What’s surprising is they didn’t settle these cases I would settle the best cases with the best lawyers and bring to trial the worst cases with the worst trials I’m guessing they thought that was their strategy and plaintiffs’ demands for settlement were just too high The “Texas two-step” is a corporate maneuver that involves a divisional merger strategy often associated with liability restructuring for companies facing numerous lawsuits They know the Texas Two-Step will not work and will just cost them millions more in legal fees from a company that is already bleeding legal fees But I do not think a single person within Bayer is really considering this as an option And get back to ruling the agricultural world The jury awarded $7 million in compensatory damages and $325 million in punitive damages Getting one huge verdict last week was great But now three for three in just a few weeks totaling over $500 million is a complete game changer We kept telling you it was smoke and mirrors – they are letting weak cases go to trial These last three verdicts prove this hypothesis He used Roundup on his lawn and garden for 35 years and was diagnosed with non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma at age 51 These typical Roundup lawsuits are getting these incredible verdicts It is time to start talking about whether Roundup is an existential threat to Bayer It would not be if Bayer just came to its senses and made reasonable settlement compensation to resolve these claims But if this keeps spiraling – and there is a new trial next month – there is no telling where it leads Bloomberg has an article today about the mounting legal troubles Bayer has after a Philadelphia jury ordered the company to pay $25 million in actual damages and $150 million in punitive damages over claims that its weed killer caused 83-year-old Ernie Caranci’s cancer The punitive damages – and the amount of the punitive damages – really sends a message to Bayer and there is a real possibility that the message will get sent again in this next trial in Pennsylvania that starts next week (and maybe in the San Diego case as well) Bayer could have settled the first round of cases for less if it had avoided those first three trials It also could have settled a good portion of the 40,000 remaining cases by settling before this Philadelphia trial which had plaintiff’s verdict written all over it I was virtually screaming it in the updates even after nine consecutive losses is said to re-evaluating the company’s strategies and aims to restore investor confidence I think what would help investor confidence is making reasonable Roundup settlement offers to victims and putting this litigation behind them even if it costs a few billion more than it originally allocated to these claims I read the book “The Travels of a T-Shirt in the Global Economy” by Pietra Rivoli The book offers a detailed exploration of the global trade and economics surrounding the lifecycle of a t-shirt and explains in stunning detail how Monsanto developed and commercialized genetically engineered cotton seeds These seeds are designed to resist certain pests which can reduce the need for pesticides and potentially increase yield Monsanto has played an unbelievably dominant role in the cotton seed market and other agricultural products and this dominance allowed it to make money hand over fist which is why it was so attractive to Bayer in the first place Bayer should focus on continuing to develop that business and stop wasting so much energy and focus on trying to beat down victims in the Roundup NHL lawsuits Just offer reasonable settlement compensation to victims and get back to doing what you do If you enjoyed Friday’s $175 million verdict keep in mind there will be another trial on November 7 in the Philadephia Common Pleas Court between now and next year We are also waiting on a verdict in San Diego Bayer has another $4-$5 billion left in their reserves to settle these cases That will not be enough to get these cases settled Update: $175 million verdict in Caranci!!! and a Philadelphia jury will deliberate today in Ernest Caranci’s lawsuit that claims that Monsanto’s Roundup weedkiller led to his non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma diagnosis we will hear from the jury today in this highly anticipated verdict It is good to see reports that Bayer made no offer in the Roundup lawsuit that resulted in a $1.25 million verdict on Friday Bayer is letting go to trial only cases it is extremely confident it can win So it is encouraging to see plaintiffs win a case it seems Bayer thought was a slam dunk Getting a win next month in Philadelphia or San Diego would be huge for the 40,000 plaintiffs who have lawsuits pending we have been talking about a new strategy employed in the three Roundup lawsuits in trial Plaintiffs’ Roundup lawyers are not focusing on glyphosate but instead making the easier and more obvious connection: Roundup causes cancer Louis jury awarded $1.25 million to a plaintiff who claimed Monsanto’s Roundup caused his non-Hodgkin lymphoma marking an end to Monsanto’s series of victories in Roundup trials The jury determined that Monsanto did not adequately warn about the risks of Roundup and its active ingredient This is a big win and gives plaintiffs fresh momentum The victory breaks a streak of nine defense wins across several states we get two more big wins in San Diego and Philadelphia and put pressure back on Bayer to make reasonable Roundup settlement offers to resolve these cases The company has already set aside billions to settle these cases these just need to set aside some more billions to put this litigation to bed Yesterday we slipped in talk of a Roundup trial in San Diego we have not previously mentioned A California state court jury in San Diego heard opening statements yet another Monsanto’s Roundup trial the plaintiff alleges that exposure to Roundup led to his non-Hodgkin lymphoma at 51 alongside two more ongoing trials in Missouri and Pennsylvania is being tried from a more 10,000 feet view than previous trials Lawyers in all three cases focus less on glyphosate and more on a more fundamental and easier-to-prove premise: Roundup causes cancer A new Roundup cancer trial is now underway in Pennsylvania state court in Philadelphia Monsanto (Bayer) has been winning almost all of the Roundup cases that have gone to trial over the last two years Many are predicting a much different outcome in this trial Philadelphia is a good jurisdiction for plaintiffs the plaintiffs’ Roundup attorney argued that the alleged cancer-causing effects of Roundup aren’t solely due to glyphosate Louis and San Diego in other trials this week which clearly marks a trial strategy change was labeled as “a problem chemical,” with claims that several harmful substances in Roundup were not disclosed on its packaging So this emphasis on other ingredients in the Monasanto weedkiller reflects a change in approach as earlier strategies focused solely on the effects of glyphosate It encourages juries to get out of the weeds and look at what really matters: does this product cause cancer Because that is the question that really matters There is reason to be optimistic about this case The McCostlin case ended up being dismissed at the close of the plaintiffs’ case today The trial judge did not believe that the plaintiff’s expert pushed them over the finish line to prove specific causation Roundup caused this man to be diagnosed with NHL What I can say now that I couldn’t say before is that the conventional wisdom was this was not a strong case I’ve repeatedly said that Monsanto is only letting weak cases go to trial It is like Alabama football only playing middle school teams and bragging about its great record this annoying strategy is working and giving Monsanto momentum where I predict a large verdict… or a big confidential settlement Donna Farmer testified yesterday in McCostlin v She has been in the middle of all this and has been the face of Monsanto She is likable when she testifies (there is a YouTube video out there you can watch) She had to admit that studies indicating the weedkiller’s impact on chromosomes were primarily conducted by independent researchers while research asserting no chromosomal harm was predominantly funded by Monsanto I wrote a since-deleted blog post saying I did not think Roundup caused cancer I did not know that Monsanto funded all the medical literature I was relying on a toxicologist from the University of Colorado testified at the latest Roundup trial in St Louis about studies that have come out since 2015 linking Roundup to NHL More recent studies have shown that it can cause other harmful effects on our body’s DNA and cells DeGrandchamp admitted that he’s made most of his money in the past 30 years by being a paid expert in court cases it’s a regrettably common practice for experts on both sides in mass torts in 2023 Let’s hope the jury focuses on the solid science he’s sharing Monsanto is available to watch on the Courtroom View Network The opening statement began yesterday in another Missouri courtroom today the plaintiff’s lawyer argued that Mr McCostlin’s non-Hodgkin lymphoma resulted from using Roundup for more than 30 years in Lenexa Bayer’s lawyer pushed their “all NHL is from random cellular errors” theory Monsanto is now seeking to exclude expert opinion testimony from Dr a prominent expert witness for the plaintiffs Schiff’s opinions about the link between Roundup and cancer rely on a flawed methodology and should In the second to last paragraph of the May 1st update below we explain why Bayer let this case go to trial It had fundamental weaknesses from the plaintiffs’ perspective on jurisdiction and the facts of the case Where are we on expected settlement amounts in the Roundup NHL lawsuits right now There are approximately ten zillion lawyer pages on Roundup and no one talks about the one issue victims care about The expected settlement amounts for the remaining inventory of Roundup weedkiller lawsuits are dropping Let’s go ahead and get that out in the open and some lawyers are losing their unbridled confidence in cases especially those involving the non-commercial use of Roundup One canary in the coal mine: lawyers are not marketing for Roundup as they were just months ago Much of this is the fruit of good strategy from Bayer’s lawyers They are trying cases they can win and settling the ones they fear which has turned the tide in terms of how much money plaintiffs’ lawyers think they are worth If you ask different attorneys in the litigation what the expected settlement payouts are now But the common thread is that those settlement payout estimates are less than they were last year at the same time Another new Roundup cancer trial began on April 26 in St This case involves Sharlean Gordon’s claims that she was regularly exposed to Roundup when her stepfather used it around the house during her childhood Gordon asserts that this exposure resulted in her being diagnosed with non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma at age 39 (making Gordon one of the youngest Roundup plaintiffs to go to trial) plaintiffs pushed a Monsanto memo from 2009 written by Donna Farmer the chief toxicologist at Monsanto’s product safety center “You cannot say that Roundup does not cause cancer We have not done the carcinogenicity studies with Roundup.” Montsanto’s lawyers like the non-commercial cases anyway and this one has particular appeal for them because the exposure was so long ago It is also helpful to Bayer that the plaintiff is obese (a risk factor) and has been cancer-free for ten years So they are willing to roll the dice in St where juries are generally more conservative than those in the nearby City of St where several Roundup lawsuits are waiting to be heard Bayer continues to pick and choose its spots Three more Roundup trials are scheduled for June in Florida Monsanto is asking the Eleventh Circuit to affirm the dismissal of a lawsuit claiming the company failed to warn about Roundup’s health risks alleges he developed soft-tissue cancer from years of using the glyphosate-based weedkiller on his lawn This is the goofy case where Bayer paid Carson to appeal his case trying to split the circuits so the Supreme Court would take the case The Supreme Court has already refused to hear Bayer’s appeal Monsanto argues that Carson’s claims are preempted by federal pesticide labeling law which disallows any state-law labeling or packaging requirements that differ from those required under federal law A district court initially threw out Carson’s suit but was reinstated in July 2022 by a three-judge appeals court panel The full Eleventh Circuit agreed to review Monsanto’s appeal in December 2022 an expert plaintiffs’ witness in several Roundup lawsuits has been reinstated at the State University of New York at Albany after Monsanto lawyers attempted to discredit him Lawyers for Monsanto contacted the University after Carpenter served as an expert in Roundup cases and prompted the University to put the professor on leave pending an investigation Monsanto’s defense team attempted to use the investigation to their advantage in several ongoing Roundup cases the University reinstated Carpenter and cleared him of wrongdoing There is a deeper backstory that will eventually come out of this A new study published in the Journal of the National Cancer Institute presented further evidence that chronic exposure to glyphosate (the chemical in Roundup) increases cancer risk The study included 268 farmers with occupational exposure to glyphosate and compared their health histories to non-farmers without exposure It found that specific oxidative stress biomarkers (known to increase cancer risk) were significantly higher in the group with glyphosate exposure the latest Roundup cancer trial was supposed to get underway in California state court Bayer settled the lawsuit at the last minute because that is what it does when the plaintiff has a strong case It was set for trial in San Francisco last month just three days before the trial was supposed to begin the clerk removed it from the calendar with a note stating So we cannot know how much Bayer paid to the plaintiff But it is fair to say a settlement premium is paid for cases ripe for trial Louis involving claims that exposure to Roundup caused cancer has resulted in a disappointing defense verdict and the jury found that the plaintiff had failed to prove his case Ten more Roundup cases are set for trial in the months ahead Bayer offers a Roundup settlement in some of these cases The next Roundup trial started in California state court this week The plaintiff in this Monsanto lawsuit regularly sprayed Roundup on his Northern California property for over 30 years He continued to use Roundup after his NHL diagnosis in 2007 because he did not know of the risk of NHL associated with Roundup Louis resulted in a significant victory for Bayer which won defense verdicts against all three plaintiffs But California juries have awarded billions in the three Roundup verdicts Louis involving three separate plaintiffs and lasting nearly a month concluded yesterday The first handful of Roundup bellwether trials in 2018 resulted in gigantic verdicts for the plaintiffs The verdicts were so significant that Bayer was forced to stop any additional trials and settle most of the pending Roundup cases Bayer has achieved defense victories in 5 state court Roundup trials in a row the recent trials involved cases that Bayer essentially hand-picked because they featured weaker claims Four of the five most recent wins were in cases where Bayer was a heavy favorite to win because the facts were not strong for the victims bringing the claims An Arkansas state judge in an upcoming trial for a Roundup lawsuit ordered Bayer AG CEO Werner Baumann to be deposed about lymphoma and leukemia risk associated with Roundup This is the first time Baumann has been ordered to testify in the Roundup cancer lawsuits Jury selection begins today in a new Roundup cancer trial in St and the entire proceeding will be webcast live by Courtroom View Network et al.) involves three plaintiffs in their 60 and 70s who used Roundup regularly for years and were subsequently diagnosed with lymphoma This will be the first Roundup case to go to trial in Saint Louis County Circuit Court an urban venue that is not kind to corporate defendants Bayer settled a large group of cases to avoid going to trial in St With several additional Roundup trials in St the outcome of this trial could have a significant ripple effect Bayer still has over $6 billion earmarked for the settlement of current and future Roundup claims The 11th Circuit ruled yesterday that claims that Bayer failed to adequately warn of the risk of cancer associated with Roundup are not subject to preemption under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act. A federal judge in Georgia had dismissed a claim a plaintiff’s claim that Roundup caused his malignant fibrosis histiocytoma after using Roundup for 30 years The goofy – there is no other word – thing about this case is that Bayer already settled with this plaintiff and required the plaintiffs to appeal the duty to warn claim against Bayer Bayer hoped to create a split in the circuit courts to compel the Supreme Court to hear the case All of this legal scheming… and Bayer has nothing to show for it Supreme Court declined to hear a second Roundup verdict this time the $87 million verdict for Alberta and Alva Pilliod Bayer had a slightly different – albeit ridiculous – additional argument that the punitive damages award violated the U.S The conventional wisdom is that Bayer must pay another $5 billion or more to settle the remaining 30,000 Roundup lawsuits That would be an average Roundup settlement of $167,000 This will not be enough money to settle these Monsanto lawsuits But not all of those 30,000 claims are viable lawsuits (Some Roundup lawyers are gathering cases with dubious merit.) But the Roundup settlement numbers look much better at 20,000 or 25,000 claims and Bayer putting up a few billion in addition to the $5 billion to increase settlement amounts to resolve these cases The Supreme Court rejected Bayer’s appeal This marks Bayer’s fourth consecutive victory in a Roundup trial It is easy to place too much significance on these recent defeats But as we get away from the MDL class action lawsuit and move towards more trials across the country in state courts this allows Bayer to pick and choose the Roundup lawsuits it wants to try and the cases it wants to settle the jury found for Bayer in the Shelton case in Kansas City A loss – any loss – in a Roundup weed killer lawsuit hurts But you have to keep in mind that Bayer settled the last case coming up for trial in Kansas City because it did not like the facts Bayer liked this case better and took it to trial There will be more trials and more victories for plaintiffs The frustrating thing about this loss is that a big verdict in Shelton would have destroyed Bayer’s morale to defend these cases they likely are emboldened until the next significant verdict Pennsylvania state court Judge Lysette Shirdon-Harris has ordered a mini Roundup class action lawsuit Her order consolidates over 100 Roundup lawsuits into a class action consolidated for discovery How are these Roundup lawsuits in state court These lawsuits also name as a defendant the chemical maker Nouryon which produces a key toxic element of Roundup (February 2024 Update: This proved prophetic with $2.5 billion in verdicts in the first three trials.) Not too long ago, Roundup was the most popular weedkiller in the world, used by homeowners and professional farmers. But then, many scientific studies started suggesting that prolonged exposure to glyphosate (the active ingredient in Roundup) might cause non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma and other cancers These studies led specific international health organizations to add glyphosate to their list of possible human carcinogens sparking a rapid downward spiral for Roundup The Roundup MDL gradually grew to over 100,000 cases with thousands of additional Roundup cases pending in state courts in California I think Monsanto had a somewhat unique corporate resolve to ignore the evidence that Roundup causes NHL They started off relying on unreliable data to prove their hypothesis I’m convinced this is how history will write this story The first Roundup cases went to trial with disastrous results for Bayer The first two trials resulted in $289 million and $80 million verdicts The third trial ended in an eye-popping verdict of $2 billion for the plaintiff These verdicts effectively broke Bayer’s resolve and they immediately shifted their focus to negotiating settlements they set aside $16 billion to cover settlements of pending claims told investors that the company had reached tentative settlement agreements in roughly 98,000 pending Roundup lawsuits This accounts for nearly 80% of all pending Roundup cases Bayer has brokered these settlements primarily by negotiating block settlement arrangements with lawyers with large litigation cases there are approximately 67,000 open Roundup lawsuits The Roundup settlements are somewhat complicated because they create a complex point-scoring system designed to rank cases into settlement tiers based on the strength of claims and severity of injuries Case-specific factors such as type of cancer Individual cases are then placed into settlement tiers based on point scores and cases with higher scores get a bigger payout Cases with lower point scores end up getting much smaller payouts While Bayer continues to work on settling these remaining Roundup cases the company is telling investors that future Roundup liabilities will depend on the outcome of the company’s appeal to the U.S Future liability has been one of the most significant issues for Bayer in the Roundup litigation It may take years or even decades for Roundup users to develop lymphoma This means Bayer could face a steady stream of new Roundup lawsuits for the next 20 years This type of “long tail” tort liability can be a nightmare for publicly traded corporations like Bayer Bayer sought to deal with future liability issues through a controversial global Roundup settlement arrangement that would have stayed and potentially frozen all future Roundup lawsuits This proposal met fierce opposition and was rejected by the MDL back in May Bayer has now adopted a two-pronged strategy to limit its future Roundup liability Bayer announced it would pull glyphosate-based Roundup from retail shelves at the start of 2023 The original Roundup will be replaced by a new version that does not contain glyphosate This move will effectively cap any future Roundup liability years down the line The second prong of Bayer’s strategy is based on winning an appeal to the Supreme Court in the Hardeman case Hardeman was the very first Roundup bellwether trial that resulted in a massive verdict hoping to win a game-changing legal argument Bayer is arguing that the Roundup claims should be preempted by federal law because the EPA has found that cancer warnings are not required for glyphosate If Bayer can get an appellate court to accept this legal argument it would effectively block many future Roundup claims Bayer has already presented this argument to the 9th Circuit and lost Bayer filed a petition for certiorari with the Supreme Court in the Hardeman appeal Bayer hopes the Supreme Court appeal will save them, but the company already has a solid backup plan. If the Supreme Court declines to hear the case or rejects Bayer’s legal argument, Bayer plans to set up an administrative process to handle future claims and has already set aside $4 billion to cover the cost. (Get an update on the Supreme Court appeal.) So the real question in 2025 is what the average Roundup compensation payout will be for the remaining cases If you had asked this question before November 2023 our lawyers would have said less than we would today These billion verdicts have to mean something many expected the average payout for a Roundup lawsuit to be higher than the original Monsanto settlements in the original $10 billion deal That optimism has waned a bit in recent months with the recent 3rd Circuit opinion and a few of the recent verdicts But we are taking about average Roundup settlements you can expect there of be a significant range around that average figure Roundup litigation is not only still active in 2025—it is surging What began as a small group of lawsuits against Monsanto has become one of the largest mass torts in American history with tens of thousands of cases still pending and more being filed regularly Monsanto—resulted in a $289 million verdict for the plaintiff Two more headline-grabbing verdicts followed: $80 million in Hardeman v Monsanto and a jaw-dropping $2 billion in Pilliod v sent shockwaves through Bayer and exposed years of internal documents showing efforts to downplay risks and manipulate scientific research Bayer attempted to stabilize the litigation by allocating over $10 billion to settle the bulk of the pending lawsuits—around 100,000 in total These settlements used a tiered points-based system to determine compensation with payouts generally ranging from $100,000 to $160,000 depending on the severity of illness Bayer also proposed a controversial plan to stay and manage future lawsuits through a separate class settlement that would have limited claimants’ rights to a jury trial Juries across the country resumed hammering the company with massive verdicts: Plaintiffs have now won a bunch of Roundup trials with billions in verdicts and over-reliance on outdated EPA guidance—has lost credibility with juries Bayer has set aside another $5.9 billion to cover future liability Bayer is once again petitioning the Supreme Court to revisit the issue hoping that a recent Third Circuit ruling in Schaffner v Monsanto—which accepted the preemption argument—might create the circuit split needed to gain the Court’s attention But little has changed since the Court declined to intervene three years ago Given the steady drumbeat of plaintiff verdicts and the volume of scientific evidence now in the public record Bayer’s hope that the Supreme Court will now rewrite product liability law seems far-fetched Several firms are rumored to be negotiating private deals to resolve blocks of cases But a full global resolution remains elusive The long tail of this litigation will extend for years Many individuals exposed to Roundup in the 1990s and 2000s may only now begin developing NHL or other glyphosate-related illnesses Bayer’s move to pull glyphosate-based Roundup from store shelves in 2023 may limit future exposure but it will not stop new claims based on past use Personal injury lawyers handling serious personal injury truck and auto accident medical malpractice and products liability cases throughout the United States This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply Please do not include any confidential or sensitive information in a contact form The contact form sends information by non-encrypted email or leaving a voicemail does not create an attorney-client relationship Personal Injury Lawyers Serving the Entire U.S Contact Us Have You Or a Loved One Suffered From a Defective Product or Device Have You Or A Loved One Suffered From Nursing Home Abuse The herbicide Roundup® contains glyphosate If you or a loved one has cancer after heavily using the toxic weed killer you may be able to pursue compensation from a Monsanto Roundup lawsuit At Sokolove Law, our Roundup lawsuit lawyers have already secured millions for families nationwide. Call (800) 995-1212 now for a free case review to see if we can help you too Get a Free Roundup Case Review Glyphosate in Roundup has been classified as “probably carcinogenic to humans” by the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) and gardeners have filed Roundup cancer claims against Bayer alleging the company failed to warn them of the dangers associated with Roundup Sokolove Law has secured more than $9.8 Billion total for clients across all 50 states and contacting us with your questions is free Our Roundup lawsuit lawyers can handle every step of the legal process on your behalf if you qualify from finding the evidence of exposure to filing your claim If you or a loved one developed cancer after being exposed to glyphosate, you may be eligible for compensation from a Roundup blood cancer lawsuit. Contact us now to get started Anyone who regularly used glyphosate weed killers and was later diagnosed with non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma or another related cancer may qualify for the Roundup lawsuit Even if your loved one has already passed away you may still be able to file a Roundup cancer lawsuit and seek justice on their behalf Call (800) 995-1212 now to find out if you qualify We'll ask you a few questions about your diagnosis and past Roundup exposure to see if you may have a case Despite Bayer’s repeated statements that Roundup and glyphosate don’t cause cancer emerging research has continued to claim otherwise Exposure to glyphosate can increase the risk of certain cancers by as much as 41% according to the University of Washington’s Department of Environmental & Occupational Health Sciences (DEOHS) The majority of Roundup cancer cases involve blood cancers that impact the production of white blood cells in the body Cancers that qualify for Roundup lawsuits may include: Around 85% of non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma cases are B-cell lymphomas which develop when the genetic code of a lymphocyte is altered Studies show glyphosate is associated with epigenotoxicity Roundup lawsuit compensation may be able to help pay for medical bills Our Roundup lawsuit attorneys have already secured millions from glyphosate claims Get a Free Case Review Now Every state has Roundup lawsuit deadlines or statutes of limitations, which prevent people from taking legal action after a certain point. This makes it very important to contact a national Roundup law firm like Sokolove Law as soon as possible the Roundup lawsuit statute of limitations is between 1 and 3 years after your cancer diagnosis or the date you learned about the connection between Roundup exposure and your illness you won’t be able to file a Roundup cancer claim again We can help you figure these deadlines out and file before it’s too late. Call (800) 995-1212 now so you don’t miss out on the justice you deserve get in touch with an experienced attorney who can file a claim on your behalf Taking legal action against a large corporation can be incredibly difficult without help from reputable Roundup law firms our Roundup attorneys can handle every step of the legal process for you so you can focus on your health and loved ones during this difficult time Filing a Roundup lawsuit claim consists of the following steps: Your attorney will keep you informed on your case’s progress as it makes its way through the justice system There are no hourly fees or out-of-pocket costs — we only get paid if your case is successful Call (800) 995-1212 now to find out if your family may qualify for a Roundup lawsuit settlement Bayer has been ordered to pay workers with cancer and their loved ones through both Roundup lawsuit settlements and verdicts: we’ve already recovered millions of dollars from Roundup settlements for clients across the country we secured $1.16 Million for a New York man who was diagnosed with stage 4 lymphoma after using Roundup products on his crops Our Roundup cancer attorneys will fight hard to get you everything you’re entitled to our Roundup cancer lawyers can fight for a settlement or verdict on your behalf Contact Us Now The average Roundup settlement amount will vary based on the details of each case like the extent of your Roundup exposure and the severity of your illness Roundup settlement amounts may range from tens of thousands to hundreds of thousands of dollars — and Billions of dollars in Roundup settlements and verdicts have been paid to multiple cancer victims and their families across the country. Be sure to get all of the latest Roundup litigation updates so you know where these cases stand and what they recently awarded Sokolove Law has helped families hold powerful corporations accountable for the harm they’ve caused Our Roundup lawsuit attorneys have the resources to fight for the most compensation possible in your case Get started now with a free case review Let us put our decades of experience to work for you Roundup settlement amounts may be determined by many factors While there’s never a guarantee of compensation in any case our Roundup attorneys will take all of these factors and more into account to maximize the settlement you may receive Over 4,400 claims filed against Bayer and Monsanto have been consolidated into a Roundup class action lawsuit or multidistrict litigation while an additional 50,000+ individual claims are currently pending in state courts one person represents a whole group of people affected by the same problem everybody in the class action receives compensation you may be able to secure more money from an individual Roundup lawsuit settlement or trial verdict than from a class action lawsuit Individual lawsuits aren’t filed by a group and allow your case to get the personal attention it deserves our Roundup lawyers have the skills and resources necessary to level the playing field and stand up to the companies responsible for your illness Learn how Sokolove Law stands out from other Roundup law firms: With extensive experience handling Roundup cancer claims our lawyers are prepared to be your voice and fight tirelessly on your behalf Working with an experienced Roundup lawyer is highly recommended since it may improve your chances of securing compensation it can be incredibly difficult to take legal action against a large corporation on your own Every step of a Roundup weed killer lawsuit requires a skilled legal team to prevent errors — and our Roundup attorneys have decades of experience helping those injured by major corporations Roundup remains the most commonly used herbicide in the country This widespread use raises significant concerns about the dangers associated with glyphosate exposure Roundup products containing glyphosate are typically sold as ready-to-use mixes or concentrates The concentrate contains higher levels of glyphosate than pre-mixed products Glyphosate-based products sold by Roundup include: Concentrated Roundup may put users at greater risk since they may also be exposed to glyphosate during mixing The majority of concentrate users include industrial and agriculture workers like farmers Understanding where and how Roundup is used is essential to determining who may be at risk of Roundup-related cancers Roundup products are marketed for three uses: Approximately 26 million pounds of glyphosate-containing Roundup is sprayed in public areas like playgrounds according to Public Interest Research Groups (PIRG) Bayer announced that the company intends to remove glyphosate from the residential lawn and garden marketplace as of January 2023 Over 90% of the Roundup lawsuits Bayer has faced over the last few years come from the U.S Professional and agricultural users like farmers and retailers are still able to purchase glyphosate for weed control our Roundup lawsuit lawyers have already helped hundreds of families across the country seek justice and secure a weed killer settlement If you or a loved one was diagnosed with non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma after using glyphosate weed killers you may be eligible for Roundup compensation that we can pursue on your behalf We’ve recovered over $9.8 Billion total for our clients nationwide Our dedicated team can guide you through the legal process and there are no hourly fees or out-of-pocket costs to work with us Let us fight for you. Call (800) 995-1212 now or fill out our contact form for a free All brands are trademarks of their respective companies People are suing Monsanto because they used Roundup — one of the company’s most popular products — and later developed cancer potentially caused by Roundup exposure Though Monsanto denies that glyphosate is dangerous both the corporation and consumers cannot ignore the trials they have lost in favor of the plaintiffs who claim otherwise Anyone may be able to file a Roundup weed killer lawsuit if they used this product and later developed non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma Find out if you may qualify for the Roundup cancer lawsuit now during a free case review your lawyers will need to prove that you or your loved one were exposed to glyphosate weed killers and have cancer as a result Some of the evidence your Roundup lawsuit lawyers may gather include: If you have a case, our Roundup lawsuit attorneys can gather all of the evidence needed to prove a link between your exposure to glyphosate and your diagnosis You only have a limited amount of time to file a Roundup cancer lawsuit due to state laws called statutes of limitations you won’t be able to take legal action for your illness again Roundup lawsuit deadlines vary from state to state but are typically 1 to 3 years after the date of your diagnosis or when you found out about the connection between Roundup and your cancer Call (800) 995-1212 as soon as possible so we can file your claim before the deadline for the Roundup lawsuit has passed Approximately 4,400 claims have been consolidated into Roundup class action lawsuits or multidistrict litigation (MDL) in California — and there’s still time for you to join We can help determine your Roundup lawsuit eligibility. Get started now for free there are no upfront costs or hourly fees to work with our Roundup lawyers We only get paid if we successfully secure compensation for you we have Roundup attorneys in offices across the country so we can help with your claim wherever you may be in the U.S Past Roundup lawsuit payouts have ranged from upwards of $10,000 to over $1,000,000 in some cases and there’s never a guarantee of success in any case we’re prepared to fight for the most compensation possible on your behalf we’ve secured more than $9.8 Billion for our clients including millions for victims of Roundup exposure The average roundup settlement per person is based on multiple factors our Roundup lawsuit lawyers may be able to provide you with an estimate of how much your claim could be worth Roundup settlements per person can be anywhere from tens of thousands to millions of dollars At Sokolove Law, our Roundup lawsuit attorneys will fight hard to get you everything you’re entitled to. Call (800) 995-1212 now to find out if you may be eligible for Roundup settlements Once your attorney has successfully negotiated a Roundup settlement on your behalf you may receive compensation within a few weeks or months Thousands of settlements have already been paid out to victims Your Roundup lawyer can determine what the settlement timeline may look like for your particular case The average Roundup payout will vary from case to case but recent Roundup lawsuit payouts include: Find out if you may be eligible for a Roundup payout now during a free case review Glyphosate exposure can significantly increase the risk of developing certain cancers — yet Bayer and Monsanto continue to deny the dangers of Roundup Cancers that may qualify for the Roundup lawsuit include: Find out if you may be able to file a Roundup blood cancer lawsuit and pursue compensation that can help pay for medical bills and other expenses It is believed that exposure to Roundup may cause non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma a type of blood cancer that affects the white blood cells Types of lymphoma caused by Roundup may include: If you used or worked near Roundup and later developed lymphoma you may be able to file a Roundup blood cancer lawsuit for compensation The Monsanto papers are company documents and records that were made public as a part of the recent Roundup lymphoma lawsuits These internal documents revealed a web of deceit surrounding Monsanto’s use of “scientific” knowledge claiming Roundup was safe Monsanto continues to deny that Roundup causes cancer to this day controversy over the safety of Roundup has continued to grow following the release of these papers there have been approximately 170,000 Roundup cancer claims filed against Monsanto and Bayer There’s still time to file a Monsanto lawsuit for Roundup cancer. Call (800) 995-1212 now to see if we can help you pursue the compensation you deserve More than 100,000 lawsuits against Roundup manufacturers Monsanto and Bayer settled for nearly $11 Billion and multiple other victims have successfully won trial verdicts in the past few years At Sokolove Law, we’ve already secured millions from lawsuits against Roundup. See if you have a case now You have almost nothing to lose and everything to gain from filing a Roundup cancer lawsuit against Monsanto You never deserved to develop cancer from a product that was marketed as safe you can seek justice from Monsanto and Bayer for the illness they may have caused Despite mounting concerns about the product’s safety Roundup is still available for purchase throughout the United States as of May 2025 Commercial Roundup products still contain glyphosate but the company committed to removing the chemical from residential Roundup products by January 2023 Bayer announced their intention to remove glyphosate from residential products because over 90% of the Roundup lawsuits faced by the company came from the U.S LeBlanc is the Managing Attorney at Sokolove Law Ricky is responsible for all communications with prospective clients and along with his team of paralegals and case managers Call Us (800) 995-1212 or we have recovered billions of dollars in compensation for our clients Learn why people across the nation trust us to handle their cases For legal help, call (800) 995-1212 What We Believe Sokolove Law has helped thousands of people over the last 45 years get the legal attention they deserve. While filing a legal claim may seem overwhelming, our lawyers can help you every step of the way. Contact us by phone We have locations nationwide to serve you today While Sokolove Law LLC maintains joint responsibility most cases are referred to other attorneys for principal responsibility Do not stop taking a prescribed medication without first consulting with your doctor Discontinuing a prescribed medication without your doctor's advice can result in injury or death Sokolove Law and the Sokolove Law logo are federally registered trademarks of Sokolove Law but we are available to answer your questions Your gateway to environmental health knowledge Join the Environmental Health News community Tennessee lawmakers are advancing a bill that would shield pesticide manufacturers from some liability lawsuits even as critics point to past industry efforts to suppress health risk data Caroline Eggers reports for WPLN News. “This bill takes away your rights when the pesticide label is a lie and it makes you sick or destroys your fields as a fresh wave of state-level bills seeks to limit lawsuits related to pesticide exposure critics argue these efforts amount to a shield for industry Related: Op-ed: If Bayer really wanted to stand with farmers, it would stop selling them toxics hand-picked by our editors and researchers We offer a host of daily and weekly options Nonprofit organizations MADE SAFE and Plastic Pollution Coalition released the new Healthy Pregnancy Guideto help parents-to-be navigate the challenges of making healthier living choices for babies and the planet a newsroom powered by Environmental Health Sciences It all improves the health of our communities containers of Roundup are displayed on a store shelf in San Francisco NEW YORK (AP) — A jury in Georgia has ordered Monsanto parent Bayer to pay nearly $2.1 billion in damages to a man who says the company’s Roundup weed killer caused his cancer according to attorneys representing the plaintiff Plaintiff John Barnes filed his lawsuit against Monsanto in 2021 seeking damages related to his non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma said the verdict will help put his client in a better position to get the treatment he needs going forward and he was happy that the truth related to the product (has) been exposed,” Findley told The Associated Press on Sunday He called the verdict an “important milestone” after “another example of Monsanto’s refusal to accept responsibility for poisoning people with this toxic product.” Monsanto said Friday’s verdict “conflicts with the overwhelming weight of scientific evidence and the consensus of regulatory bodies and their scientific assessments worldwide.” The company added that it continues “to stand fully behind the safety” of Roundup products soybeans and cotton — Roundup is designed to work with genetically modified seeds that resist the weedkiller’s deadly effect It allows farmers to produce more while conserving the soil by tilling it less Findley said that evidence relating to Barnes’ case show “many years of cover-ups” and “backroom dealings.” He accused Monsanto of ignoring several scientific studies related to the toxicity of Roundup and said the company “tried to find ways to persuade and distract and deny the connection between this product and non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma.” Friday’s decision marks the fourth Roundup-related verdict that Findley’s team has won to date — the largest of which was awarded in Philadelphia in January 2024 And he said his law firm has “many more clients who are similarly situated as Mr 2025 to correct the third paragraph to show the Georgia jury reached a verdict This website is using a security service to protect itself from online attacks The action you just performed triggered the security solution There are several actions that could trigger this block including submitting a certain word or phrase You can email the site owner to let them know you were blocked Please include what you were doing when this page came up and the Cloudflare Ray ID found at the bottom of this page a synthetic herbicide patented in 1974 by the Monsanto Company and now manufactured and sold by many companies in hundreds of products has been associated with cancer and many other health concerns discussed in this fact sheet Glyphosate is best known as the active ingredient in Roundup-branded herbicides and the herbicide used with “Roundup Ready” genetically modified organisms (GMOs) Monsanto owner Bayer AG said it removed glyphosate-based herbicides from the U.S. consumer market in 2023 due to litigation. More than 100,000 people are suing Bayer alleging they developed non-Hodgkin lymphoma from exposure to the company’s glyphosate herbicides, such as Roundup. We are posting documents released via discovery on our Monsanto Papers page Glyphosate will still be used in large quantities in agriculture in the U.S. Reformulated versions of Roundup brand herbicides without glyphosate will also remain on the market, but may contain other chemicals of concern. For example, one of the active ingredients in “Roundup for Lawns” is dicamba a chemical that can damage non-target plants and crops Glyphosate is the most widely used agricultural chemical, according to a February 2016 study: “In the U.S. no pesticide has come remotely close to such intensive and widespread use.” Findings include: In the U.S., approximately 281 million pounds of glyphosate were applied to 298 million acres annually, on average, from 2012 to 2016, according to the EPA The most glyphosate was applied to soybean (117.4 million pounds per year) corn and cotton have high percentages of their acres treated with glyphosate health care professionals and public interest groups have raised concern about the health impacts of glyphosate Monsanto owner Bayer AG maintains that glyphosate and glyphosate-based herbicides are safe when used as directed and do not cause cancer “Glyphosate is one of the most studied herbicides in the world – and it is subject to rigorous testing and oversight by regulatory authorities,” Bayer states on its website “There is an extensive body of research on glyphosate and glyphosate-based herbicides… that confirm that glyphosate and our glyphosate-based formulated products can be used safely and do not cause cancer.” A 2017 study in JAMA found that Americans’ exposure to glyphosate increased approximately 500 percent since Roundup Ready GMO crops were introduced in 1996 While it is clear that most Americans are being exposed to glyphosate, the literature on glyphosate exposure levels, especially in children, remains limited, according to a 2020 paper in Environmental Health “Without more data collected in a standardized way parsing out the potential relationship between glyphosate exposure and disease will not be possible,” the researchers concluded Regulators in Europe and the United States Canada and elsewhere have repeatedly affirmed the corporate assertions of glyphosate safety These regulators have relied in part on tests that are conducted by or for the companies that have not been published or peer reviewed The corporate studies have long been kept secret litigation by a group of European Parliament lawmakers led to the release of dozens of such studies More than 50 corporate studies were analyzed in 2021 by independent scientists from the Institute of Cancer Research Department of Medicine at the Medical University of Vienna The scientific literature and regulatory conclusions regarding cancer links to glyphosate and glyphosate-based herbicides show a mix of findings making the safety of the herbicide a hotly debated subject The team of international scientists found there was a particular association between glyphosate and non-Hodgkin lymphoma In June 2021, the European Union’s (EU) Assessment Group on Glyphosate (AGG) issued an 11,000-page draft report concluding that glyphosate is safe when used as directed and does not cause cancer The finding is based in part on a dossier of roughly 1,500 studies submitted to European regulators by the “Glyphosate Renewal Group (GRG),” a collection of companies that includes Monsanto owner Bayer AG The companies are seeking the renewal of the EU authorization of glyphosate Current authorization in Europe expires in 2023 a group funded in part by Monsanto and one of its lobbying organizations California OEHHA: In March 2017, the California Environmental Protection Agency’s Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment confirmed it would add glyphosate to California’s Proposition 65 list of chemicals known to cause cancer Monsanto sued to block the action but the case was dismissed the court found that California could not require cancer warnings for products containing glyphosate District Court denied the California Attorney General’s request for the court to reconsider the decision The court found that California could only require commercial speech that disclosed “purely factual and uncontroversial information,” and the science surrounding glyphosate carcinogenicity was not proven A March 2025 study in Food and Chemical Toxicology found that glyphosate-based Roundup herbicide altered key breast cancer-related genes and had varying toxic and proliferative effects on different breast cell types some of these harmful changes were reversible with epigenetic treatments highlighting the need to better understand glyphosate’s impact and its potential risks for breast cancer and their in-depth review of evidence on genotoxicity and endocrine disruption revealed “strong and consistent positive findings.” The findings “strengthen the mechanistic evidence that glyphosate is a probable human carcinogen and provide biological plausibility for previously reported cancer associations in humans A pooled study of three case-control studies published in March 2023 in Leukemia and Lymphoma journal found a statistically significant increased risk and confirmed an association between Non-Hodgkin Lymphoma (NHL) and exposure to certain herbicides including glyphosate A February 2020 paper in Environmental Health presents a comprehensive review of chronic exposure animal carcinogenicity studies of glyphosate It reports toxicologically plausible pathways for why glyphosate may cause various cancers in rodents A March 2019 study published in the International Journal of Epidemiology analyzed data from more than 30,000 farmers and agricultural workers from studies done in France and reported links between glyphosate and diffuse large B-cell lymphoma In March 2015, the World Health Organization’s International Agency for Research on Cancer classified glyphosate as “probably carcinogenic to humans” (Group 2A) “This was based on ‘limited’ evidence of cancer in humans (from real-world exposures that actually occurred) and ‘sufficient’ evidence of cancer in experimental animals (from studies of ‘pure’ glyphosate) IARC also concluded that there was ‘strong’ evidence for genotoxicity both for “pure” glyphosate and for glyphosate formulations.” “We conclude that increased research efforts are warranted regarding the safety and efficacy of [glyphosate-based herbicides] as it pertains to female reproduction as well as investments in cost-effective alternatives…” A January 2025 study in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS) finds “significant adverse perinatal health effects due to increased glyphosate exposure in the rural United States.” Researchers from the University of Oregon reported “Our results suggest the introduction of GM seeds and glyphosate significantly reduced average birthweight and gestational length While we find effects throughout the birthweight distribution low expected-weight births experienced the largest reductions: Glyphosate’s birthweight effect for births in the lowest decile is 12 times larger than that in the highest decile.” “A global decline in human fertility and more precisely in semen quality over the past few decades has been reported in epidemiological studies,” write the authors of a June 2024 study in Ecotoxicology and Environmental Safety The researchers measured glyphosate and its main metabolite in the sperm and blood plasma of infertile French men: “we detected for the first time GLY in the human seminal plasma in significant proportions and we showed that its concentration was four times higher than those observed in blood plasma.” They also observed a “strong positive correlation” between glyphosate sperm levels and oxidative stress our results suggest a negative impact of GLY on the human reproductive health and possibly on his progeny,” they concluded “A precaution principle should be applied” to glyphosate and glyphosate-based formulations A July 2023 study in Environmental Pollution investigated the potential effects of low levels of glyphosate exposure from weaning to adult life in male Wistar rats on hypothalamic-pituitary-thyroid (HPT) axis function Various changes suggest that glyphosate “may affect several steps of HPT axis regulation at the transcriptional level in an age-dependent manner and alter the morphometric parameters of the thyroid gland and TH synthesis with potential repercussions in the TH-target organs.” A November 2022 paper in the Review of Economic Studies discusses glyphosate exposure and birth outcomes of populations surrounding GMO soy growing regions in Brazil “We document a significant deterioration in birth outcomes for populations downstream from locations that are likely to have increased relatively more the use of glyphosate … average increase in glyphosate use in the sample during the 2000-2010 period led to an increase of 5% of the average in the infant mortality rate.” In a March 2021 paper in Frontiers in Endocrinology, researchers detected glyphosate in the urine of residents of rural and urban environments and reported a correlation between “farmers’ exposure to glyphosate-based herbicides and altered thyroid hormone levels or incidence of thyroid pathologies.” A July 2020 paper published in Molecular and Cellular Endocrinology asks if glyphosate and glyphosate-based herbicides alter female fertility The paper summarizes the endocrine-disrupting effects of exposure to glyphosate and glyphosate-based herbicides at low or “environmentally relevant” doses in the female reproductive tissues glyphosate-based herbicides may have adverse effects on the female reproductive tract fertility A June 2020 paper in Veterinary and Animal Science concludes that some ingredients of glyphosate-based herbicides appear to act as reproductive toxicants having a wide range of effects on both the male and female reproductive systems tissue damage and dysfunction of gametogenesis A June 2020 paper in Environmental Pollution finds that neonatal exposure to glyphosate-based herbicides decreased cell proliferation and altered the expression of molecules that control proliferation and development in the uterus potentially affecting the female reproductive health of sheep A July 2020 study in Toxicology and Applied Pharmacology found indications that “chronic low-level exposure to glyphosate alters the ovarian proteome and may ultimately impact ovarian function.” A September 2020 study in Food and Chemical Toxicology reports that perinatal exposure to a glyphosate-based herbicide or glyphosate “disrupted critical hormonal and uterine molecular targets during the receptive state possibly associated with the implantation failures.” A 2018 ecological and population study conducted in Argentina found high concentrations of glyphosate in the soil and dust in agricultural areas that also reported higher rates of spontaneous abortion and congenital abnormalities in children suggesting a link between environmental exposure to glyphosate and reproductive problems No other relevant sources of pollution were identified A 2018 rat study by Argentinian researchers linked low-level perinatal glyphosate exposures to impaired female reproductive performance and congenital anomalies in the next generation of offspring A birth cohort study in Indiana published in 2017 – the first study of glyphosate exposure in US pregnant women using urine specimens as a direct measure of exposure – found detectable levels of glyphosate in more than 90% of the pregnant women tested and found the levels were significantly correlated with shortened pregnancy lengths A 2011 study in Reproductive Toxicology reported that glyphosate impairs male offspring reproductive development by disrupting gonadotropin expression A 2009 study in Toxicology found that glyphosate-based herbicides are toxic and endocrine disruptors in human cell lines A 2019 study based on urinary analysis for glyphosate reported that glyphosate excretion is significantly higher in patients with nonalcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH) who are considered to be at a higher risk of fibrosis progression and development to cirrhosis and hepatocellular carcinoma A 2017 study associated chronic, very low-level glyphosate exposures to non-alcoholic fatty liver disease in rats the results “imply that chronic consumption of extremely low levels of a GBH formulation (Roundup) at admissible glyphosate-equivalent concentrations are associated with marked alterations of the liver proteome and metabolome,” the biomarkers for NAFLD According to a 2023 study in Environment, Science and Technology Letters “Chronic kidney disease of uncertain etiology (CKDu) has emerged as a serious public health concern in farming communities globally A 2024 systematic review of the effects of glyphosate exposure on intestinal microbiota, metabolism and microstructure finds that “glyphosate and its formulations are able to induce intestinal dysbiosis by altering bacterial metabolism as well as causing damage to the microvilli and the intestinal lumen enzymatic and genetic changes were also observed in the animal models damage was observed in lipid and energy metabolism we pointed out that the studies revealed that these alterations can lead to intestinal and systemic diseases such as Crohn’s disease and Alzheimer’s disease.” A 2020 literature review of glyphosate’s effects on the gut microbiome concludes that “glyphosate residues on food could cause dysbiosis given that opportunistic pathogens are more resistant to glyphosate compared to commensal bacteria.” The paper continues “Glyphosate may be a critical environmental trigger in the etiology of several disease states associated with dysbiosis inflammatory bowel disease and irritable bowel syndrome Glyphosate exposure may also have consequences for mental health through alterations in the gut microbiome.” A 2018 rat study conducted by the Ramazzini Institute reported that low-dose exposures to Roundup at levels considered safe significantly altered the gut microbiota in some of the rat pups Another 2018 study reported that higher levels of glyphosate administered to mice disrupted the gut microbiota and caused anxiety and depression-like behaviors More studies are necessary to understand population level risk associated with the product given its widespread use in agriculture.” A large nationwide study published in the journal NeuroToxicology in December 2021 reports that “several neurotoxic pesticide exposures estimated using residential location were associated with statistically significant increased risk of ALS (amyotrophic lateral sclerosis) and the insecticides carbaryl and chlorpyrifos.” ALS is a progressive nervous system disease that affects nerve cells in the brain and spinal cord A December 2024 study in the Journal of Neuroinflammation reports that, “mice exposed to the herbicide glyphosate develop significant brain inflammation which is associated with neurodegenerative disease The findings suggest the brain may be much more susceptible to the damaging effects of the herbicide than previously thought.” An April 2024 study in Environmental Research measured gestational glyphosate exposure and early childhood neurodevelopment in a Puerto Rico birth cohort. The researchers concluded, “Our results suggest that gestational exposure to glyphosate is associated with adverse early neurodevelopment with more pronounced delays at 24 months.” An October 2023 study in Scientific Reports investigated whether glyphosate exposure in rats alters synaptic transmission and long-term potentiation (LTP) a cellular model of learning and memory. The researchers’ observations “indicate that glyphosate can impair cognitive function through pro-inflammatory signaling in microglia.” A September 2023 study in the Journal of Exposure Science & Environmental Epidemiology examined the correlation between urinary glyphosate levels and serum neurofilament light chain (NfL) levels in a population representative of the U.S NfL has emerged as a reliable biomarker for various neurological disorders The study “found a significant positive association between urinary glyphosate levels and serum NfL levels … indicating that higher levels of glyphosate exposure may be linked to higher levels of neuroaxonal damage Furthermore … we observed a significant trend of increasing mean NfL concentrations with increasing quintiles of glyphosate exposure … Notably the association was more pronounced in certain subgroups “This is the first research to suggest an association between glyphosate exposure and biomarkers indicative of neurological damage in general U.S it raises concerns about the potential effects of glyphosate exposure on neurological health among U.S This study underlines the importance of understanding the impact of exposure to pesticides on the gut-brain axis and further emphasizes the need for microbiome analyses to be compulsorily included in health risk assessments of pesticides.” In a July 2023 study in Environmental Science and Pollution Research Tawainese researchers analyzed data from the 2013-2014 National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) of 1466 adults to explore the relationship between glyphosate exposure and erythrocyte profiles The study found a “significant negative association between urinary glyphosate levels and hemoglobin and hematocrit … and provides preliminary evidence of a plausible association between glyphosate exposure and anemia in a subset of the adult population in the United States.” A September 2024 study in Chemosphere reports on in vitro genomic damage caused by glyphosate and its metabolite AMPA Researchers used a micronucleus assay to evaluate genomic damage caused by glyphosate and AMPA “both glyphosate and AMPA showed genotoxic and cytotoxic properties There are evidences of a possible synergistic action of these two compounds.” An analysis of an US NHANES data published in March 2025 in Frontiers in Public Health associates glyphosate exposure with elevated risk of arthritis particularly in the subgroup of osteoarthritis A 2023 study reported that glyphosate impairs learning in bumblebees. See news coverage in Phys.org A 2018 study reported that glyphosate damaged the beneficial gut bacteria in honeybees and made them more prone to deadly infections Research from China suggests that honeybee larvae grew more slowly and died more often when exposed to glyphosate A 2015 study that found field-levels of exposure impaired the cognitive capacities of honeybees Research from 2017 correlated glyphosate use with reduced populations of monarch butterflies the main food source for monarch butterflies The first three trials ended in large awards to plaintiffs for liability and damages with juries ruling thatMonsanto’s weed killer was a substantial contributing factor in causing them to develop NHL Supreme Court has so far upheld the rulings against Bayer Some farmers use glyphosate on non-GMO crops such as wheat, barley, oats, and lentils to dry down the crop ahead of harvest in order to accelerate the harvest. This practice, known as desiccation may be a significant source of dietary exposure to glyphosate One FDA chemist found alarming levels of glyphosate in many samples of U.S levels that were technically illegal because there have been no allowable levels established for honey by the EPA Here is a recap of news about glyphosate found in food: In 2020, a group of FDA scientists published a research paper examining pesticide residue data collected from 2009-2017 results for over 56,000 human food samples collected and analyzed under the FDA pesticide residue monitoring program between fiscal years (FY) 2009 to 2017 were reviewed to identify trends not apparent in annual reports The overwhelming majority of these samples 98.0% of domestic and 90.9% of import human foods Although herbicides may be more widely used the 10 most frequently detected residues were insecticides and fungicides the violation rate for imported samples is 3-5 times higher than the rate for domestic samples The import violation rate increased over time Targeted sampling of foods with higher commodity-specific violation rates appears to be a major contributor to the increased violation rate Mismatches between US tolerances and international MRLs can lead to violations; this was especially marked for rice the majority of violations are due to residues of pesticides not authorized for use in the US (lack of tolerances) While DDT continues to persist in the environment and was found in 2.2% of domestic samples and 0.6% of imported samples 42.3% of DDT-positive samples were below the limit of quantitation The trends and analyses identified in this paper may help FDA plan future sampling and continue to protect the food supply.” Glyphosate is absorbed through leaves, stem, roots, or shoots. It works by inhibiting a key enzyme called 5-enolpyruvylshikimate-3-phosphate synthase (EPSPS) which is crucial for synthesizing three amino acids in plants This fact sheet was originally written by Carey Gillam and is regularly updated by USRTK staff Sign up for our newsletter to get our latest stories delivered straight to your inbox. This is the latest court battle Monsanto has faced over its herbicide. Monsanto parent company, Bayer, was ordered to pay $2.1 billion in damages after a jury in Georgia found the Monsanto’s weedkiller, RoundUp, responsible for the plaintiff’s cancer. This is the latest court battle Monsanto has faced over its herbicide. The plaintiff, John Barnes, filed a lawsuit in 2021 to recover damages related to his non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma, which he believed was caused from his use of RoundUp in which the product’s key ingredient, glyphosate, is said to cause cancer in various studies. “It’s been a long road for him … and he was happy that the truth related to the product (has) been exposed,” Kyle Findley, the lead trial lawyer at Arnold & Itkin, who represented the plaintiff, said. Findley said the verdict was an “important milestone” after “another example of Monsanto’s refusal to accept responsibility for poisoning people with this toxic product.” This case marks one of the largest penalties awarded in a RoundUp-related case to date, which awarded $65 million in compensatory damages and $2 billion in punitive damages to Barnes, according to law firms Arnold & Itkin LLP and Kline & Specter PC. This payout will help Barnes to get the treatment needed going forward, Findley said. Bayer, which acquired Monsanto in 2018, has been sued more than 177,000 times “involving the weedkiller and set aside $16 billion to settle cases,” AP reported. The German-based company responded to the verdict and said it “conflicts with the overwhelming weight of scientific evidence and the consensus of regulatory bodies and their scientific assessments worldwide” and it will continue “to stand fully behind the safety” of Monsanto’s products. This is the fourth Roundup-related case that Findley and his team won. As he continues to take on such cases, Findley said Monsanto “tried to find ways to persuade and distract and deny the connection between this product and non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma.” He is determined to unveil “many years of cover-ups” and “backroom dealings.” If you liked this article, please donate $5 to keep NationofChange online through November. Connecting decision makers to a dynamic network of information, people and ideas, Bloomberg quickly and accurately delivers business and financial information, news and insight around the world ColumnistMonsanto Endgame Is Risky Trade for Hedge FundsLawsuits still haunt Bayer since it bought Monsanto — putting them to rest is the key to unlocking long-term investment Bayer is bogged down by litigation linked to a weedkiller gained as part of the takeover of Monsanto Success for the German pharmaceutical company will mean becoming a viable investment for more than just the most risk-tolerant funds Bayer said last week that it would seek authorization at its forthcoming annual meeting to launch a potential large capital increase at some time over three years But the move could fund a settlement of outstanding legal claims alleging that glyphosate-based Roundup which came with Bayer’s disastrous $63 billion acquisition of Monsanto in 2018 Please supply bot IP address: 147.45.197.102 and error code: 0.b4601302.1746514295.f05b012 Monsanto has withdrawn its lawsuit challenging Mexico’s 2020 decree banning glyphosate and genetically modified (GM) corn marking a victory for the country's health and environmental policies Mexico News Daily. Monsanto's withdrawal from the lawsuit suggests a growing recognition of the power of public sentiment and the increasing influence of environmental policy in shaping corporate strategies. Read more: The Monsanto Papers. "I really was just doing my job as a journalist." Investigative reporter Carey Gillam sat down with nonprofit newsroom The Real News Network to discuss recent reporting on how Bayer/Monsanto attempted to discredit her reporting on the weedkiller glyphosate— the active ingredient in Roundup The interview comes on the heels of Gillam's piece in The Guardian last week, I'm a journalist. Monsanto built a step-by-step strategy to destroy my reputation,that outlined how Monsanto had an action plan specifically to discredit her reporting and her award-winning book "This campaign by Monsanto against me has been going on for a long time .. well more than a decade certainly," Gillam says in the Real News Network interview "And I really was just doing my job as a journalist I was reporting on the new scientific evidence that was coming out about different risks—cancer risks and other health risks—associated with Monsanto's herbicides." A string of nine- and 10-figure losses for the popular herbicide A Philadelphia jury on Friday hit Monsanto with a $175 million verdict in favor of a cancer patient who claimed the company failed to warn about known carcinogens in its best-selling herbicide The verdict is part of a string of nine- and 10-figure judgments against the Bayer AG subsidiary in recent years including 2019 verdicts of $2 billion in Oakland and $289 million in San Francisco – although those verdicts were substantially reduced upon appeal "It's a tremendous result," said R managing partner and lead trial attorney at Wisner Baum who won the $2 billion Roundup cancer verdict against Monsanto in 2019 "This case has always been about the science and this new verdict puts a huge exclamation point on that fact It's about time for Monsanto to finally pull this product off the market and negotiate a global settlement It's time to bring an end to the glyphosate chapter in our country." Bayer countered in a statement: "We respectfully disagree with the jury’s divided verdict and are confident we can get this unfounded verdict overturned and the excessive damage awards reduced through our appeal." Glyphosate is the world’s most widely used weed-killing chemical and is the active ingredient in Roundup It is linked to a number of health problems from cancer and neurological diseases to endocrine disruption and birth defects But the full range of glyphosate’s health effects remains unknown, and a number of jurisdictions – including the European Union – are wrestling over whether to keep glyphosate products on the market The International Agency for Research on Cancer has classified glyphosate as “probably carcinogenic to humans." But the European Food Safety Authority this summer did not identify any "critical areas of concern" impacting public health or the environment in its review of glyphosate the federal Environmental Protection Agency has concluded that Roundup is safe to use and that glyphosate is "not likely to be carcinogenic to humans." Friday's verdict on behalf of retired restaurateur Ernest Caranci is the first of more than 200 cases filed since 2022 waiting to go to trial in Philadelphia alone Bayer settled most Roundup claims against it in 2020 for $10.9 billion And while Bayer has recently prevailed against nine consecutive cases bringing similar claims as Caranci's thousands of additional lawsuits are waiting in state and federal courts Douglas Fischer is the executive director of Environmental Health Sciences reveal a range of deceptive tactics Byrne and other industry allies are using to promote and defend GMO foods and pesticides The examples here showcase how companies are shaping public perceptions from behind the cover of neutral-sounding front groups government helpers and academics who appear to be independent as they work with corporations or their PR consultants A year-long investigation by Lighthouse Reports found the US government funded a PR operation that cast critics of GMOs and pesticides as an anti-science “protest industry.” The operation “built profiles on hundreds of scientists whilst coordinating with government officials to counter global resistance to pesticides.” “the US government funded v-Fluence as part of its program to promote GMOs in Africa and Asia” and that the US Agency for International Development (USAID) “channelled over $400,000 to v-Fluence for services” between roughly 2013 and 2019 Update: The Guardian reported on Feb. 10, 2025 that v-Fluence has halted its operations and shuttered its portal that profiled personal details of more than 500 environmental health advocates politicians and journalists seen as critics of GMOs and pesticides (including staff at U.S Right to Know) “after widespread backlash.” More details: Below we describe Jay Byrne’s pitch to the U.S. government (with Jon Entine) to sway journalists to promote GMOs and pesticides. See also our coverage of Monsanto’s 31-page PR plan to counter the U.S. Right to Know investigations Byrne’s client list has included a range of the largest agribusiness and pharmaceutical companies and business groups Rohm & Haas and the pesticide industry trade group CropLife A key strategy of the agrichemical industry, as the New York Times reported is to deploy “white hat” professors to fight the industry’s PR and lobbying battles from behind the cover of the “gloss of impartiality and weight of authority that come with a professor’s pedigree.” which “has cashed in on this to the extreme; and I think we have a much better concept.” Byrne described an “‘opportunities’ list with targets” they could go after. Byrne wrote to Dr. Chassy: All those groups, people and topic areas “mean money for a range of well heeled corporations,” Byrne wrote. He said he and Val Giddings, PhD, a former vice president for the biotech trade group BIO could serve as “commercial vehicles” for the academics In November 2010, Byrne wrote to Chassy again “It will be good to get the next phase of work on Academics Review going – we’ve got a relative slow first quarter coming up in 2011 if business remains the same.” Byrne offered to “schedule some pro bono search engine optimization time” for his team to counter a GMO critic’s online influence would love to find the next topic (and sponsor) to broaden this while we are able.” In 2014, Academics Review released a report attacking the organic industry as a marketing scam; in its own marketing materials for the report Academics Review claimed to be independent and did not disclose its agrichemical industry funding according to internet archives still available online.) In December 2013, Entine wrote to Max T. Holtzman who was then acting deputy undersecretary at the U.S to propose collaborating on a series of what he described as “US government-GLP-Byrne projects” to promote GMOs and “multi-media content and placements from credible sources” reinforcing key themes “with segments and footage made available on U.S I think your outline below provides natural intersection points where usda/USG messaging and your efforts intersect well I’d like to engage further and loop other folks here at usda not only from the technical/trade areas but from our communications shop as well.” A series of taxpayer-funded videos produced in 2012 to promote genetically engineered foods provide another example of how academics and universities push corporate-aligned messaging Byrne’s PR firm v-Fluence helped create the videos that were “designed to appear a little low budget and amateurish,” according to an email from University of Illinois Professor Bruce Chassy Dr. Chassy wrote to Monsanto employees on April 27, 2012: Sachs offered to assist with messaging of future videos by sharing the results of focus group tests Monsanto was conducting Chassy invited Sachs to offer suggestions for future video topics and asked him to send along the Monsanto focus group results was “to train scientists and journalists to frame the debate over GMOs and the toxicity of glyphosate.” policy makers and other stakeholders.” Members receive Byrne’s newsletter plus access to his reference library of agribusiness topics “stakeholder database” of influential people in the GMO debate and trainings and support for social media engagement Miller had published an article in Forbes under his own name that had been ghostwritten by Monsanto a week before Congress voted to prohibit states from labeling GMOs Reporting for The Guardian in 2002 George Monbiot described a covert tactic that agrichemical corporations and their PR operatives have been using for decades to promote and defend their products: creating fake personalities and fake websites to silence critics and influence online search results Monbiot reported that “fake citizens” (people who did not actually exist) “had been bombarding internet listservers with messages denouncing the scientists and environmentalists who were critical of GM crops” – and the fake citizens had been traced back to Monsanto’s PR firm Bivings Monbiot described Jay Byrne’s connection to Bivings: “think of the internet as a weapon on the table … somebody is going to get killed.” formerly [Monsanto’s] director of internet outreach explained to a number of other firms the tactics he had used at Monsanto the top GM sites listed by an internet search engine were all critical of the technology the top sites were all supportive ones (four of them established by Monsanto’s PR firm Bivings) He told them to ‘think of the internet as a weapon on the table Either you pick it up or your competitor does but somebody is going to get killed.’ While he was working for Monsanto Byrne told the internet newsletter Wow that he ‘spends his time and effort participating’ in web discussions about biotech where he ‘ensures his company gets proper play’ AgBioWorld is the site on which [fake citizen] Smetacek launched her campaign.” A 2013 Power Point presentation showcases the role Byrne plays for his clients in the agrichemical industry Here he explains his theories about eco-advocates ranks their influence online and urges companies to pool their resources to confront them in order to avoid “regulatory and market constraints.” “Deconstructing the Agricultural Biotechnology Protest Industry.” This post was originally posted in 2019 and updated in 2025 with new information about the findings of Lighthouse Reports. Copyright © 2022 ALM Media Properties, LLC. A spokesperson for Monsanto said in a statement that the company believes the “cross-examination regarding risks factors for [the plaintiffs'] injury was appropriate given the evidentiary record in this case.” The spokesperson called the plaintiffs’ decision to seek a mistrial “unusual and telling.” A judge declared a mistrial Friday in a Chicago Roundup case after one of Monsanto's attorneys mentioned during a cross-examination that the plaintiff had once been charged with a criminal offense Associate Judge Daniel Trevino of the Cook County Circuit Court ruled that the lawyer's line of questioning constituted “serious misconduct" and cautioned the defense against "any further conduct that could result in sanction or a contempt finding," according to a transcript from the proceeding The case had been in its fourth week of trial The Recorder The Legal Intelligencer New York Law Journal The American Lawyer National Law Journal Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc Read More Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment Read More Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls Read More a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement Read More Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase Read More Browse More Resources Already have an account? Sign In You are using an outdated browser. Upgrade your browser to improve your experience Roundup has been linked to multiple lymphatic cancers Roundup and its key ingredient, glyphosate, have been linked to several types of cancer, including non-Hodgkin's lymphoma (NHL), b-cell lymphoma and leukemia. As a result, thousands of people have filed lawsuits claiming the popular weed killer caused them to develop cancer the weed-killing active ingredient in Roundup Court proceedings in some of the earliest Roundup trials revealed close interactions between Monsanto--the manufacturer of Roundup--and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) These interactions have cast doubt on the EPA's glyphosate rulings Internal Monsanto documents also demonstrate repeated attempts to manipulate published scientific studies and media reports in favor of glyphosate safety Keep reading to learn the facts about Monsanto and how they figure in thousands of lawsuits agricultural giant Monsanto developed glyphosate as a potent herbicide Monsanto marketed the chemical as Roundup Weed Killer it had become the most used herbicide in the United States An estimated 1.4 billion pounds of Roundup are used in more than 160 countries each year the popular weedkiller has been called into question as a possible health hazard Thousands of consumers have filed Roundup cancer claims alleging they developed non-Hodgkin's lymphoma leukemia or other forms of cancer after using the weed killer The first non-Hodgkin's lymphoma lawsuit came before a jury in 2018 resulting in a landmark $289 million verdict against Monsanto In 2018, just as these lawsuits were beginning to come before juries, Bayer finalized their acquisition of Monsanto Plaintiffs claim the herbicide caused users to develop blood cancer individuals impacted by repeated Roundup exposure may have already passed away before they or their family members understood the link between Roundup and cancer Family members of those who passed away from Roundup-associated cancer may be able to file a wrongful death lawsuit Learn more about wrongful death lawsuits >>> A Roundup class action lawsuit was filed in Los Angeles Superior Court against Monsanto claiming its advertising falsely stated that Roundup products were safe to use The class action lawsuit also claims the company deliberately falsified documents and concealed information indicating that glyphosate is dangerous to humans and environmental health Due to the growing number of Roundup cancer lawsuits federal multidistrict litigation has been consolidated under MDL No District Judge Vince Chhabria in the Northern District of California There are more than 3,800 lawsuits pending under the multidistrict litigation as of August 2020 Note: Bayer's public references to 125,000 Roundup lawsuits indicate the vast majority have not been officially filed in the MDL In April 2019, Judge Chhabria ordered Monsanto to enter into mediation with plaintiff attorneys. In June 2020, Bayer announced a $10.9 billion settlement Roughly $8.8 to $9.6 billion would be used for current claims $1.25 billion would be reserved for future litigation Learn more about Bayer's pending settlement here >>> Though there have been no Roundup settlements at this time several Roundup trials have resulted in verdicts favoring the plaintiffs Plaintiff Dewayne Johnson is a former school groundskeeper for a California county school system He was diagnosed with non-Hodgkin's lymphoma after years of using Roundup weed-killer and other glyphosate-based herbicides he used the product as many as 30 times per year and spilled a substantial amount of the chemical on his body Johnson filed a Roundup lawsuit against Monsanto claiming his use of Roundup contributed significantly to the development of his cancer Because he was diagnosed with terminal cancer California state law allowed Johnson to seek a fast-track lawsuit--though the case still took nearly two and a half years to reach trial He built his case around the classification of glyphosate as "probably carcinogenic to humans" by the International Agency for Research on Cancer He also noted that not enough testing has been done on Roundup's formulation which includes other chemicals in addition to glyphosate the San Francisco jury returned with a verdict that awarded Mr Johnson $289 million ($39 million in compensatory damages and $250 million in punitive damages) in his Roundup case an appeals court supported the current verdict in favor of Johnson the appeals court further reduced the award by 74% Johnson will instead receive $20.5 million Read more about the first Roundup verdict >>> 70-year-old Edwin Hardeman used Roundup from the 1980s through 2015 when he was diagnosed with non-Hodgkin's lymphoma claiming Monsanto ignored and withheld evidence of Roundup's link to cancer The company also failed to warn consumers of the potential hazards of the weedkiller a San Francisco jury decided unanimously in favor of Hardeman confirming Roundup was a "substantial factor" contributing to Hardeman's lymphoma diagnosis the jury awarded $80 million to Hardeman in the damages phase of his cancer lawsuit finding that Monsanto had failed to warn him and other consumers about the potential dangers of the Roundup formula an appeals court reduced the value of this award to $25 million Read more about the Hardeman verdict >>> the Pilliods testified to using Roundup regularly The couple used the consumer version of the weedkiller whose label lacked any warnings about covering skin or wearing protective masks Alva was diagnosed with non-Hodgkin's lymphoma in 2011 The Pilliods said they used Roundup because they believed it was safe Alberta even wore shorts while spraying Roundup because she had seen a man in a Roundup commercial doing the same thing The jury determined that Monsanto acted maliciously and awarded the Piliods $55 million in compensatory damages and $2 billion ($1 billion each) in punitive damages the number of lawsuits may continue climbing for some time Updates will be posted below as case developments occur 03-04-21 | Bayer Proposes $2 Billion to Settle Future Roundup Lawsuits 06-25-20 | Bayer Agrees to $10.9 Billion Roundup Settlement 07-26-19 | $2 Billion Roundup Verdict Reduced to $86.7 Million 06-14-19 | Is Roundup Dangerous? Can Weed Killer Cause Cancer? 05-14-19 | Historic Roundup Verdict Awards $2 Billion to Couple with Cancer 03-21-19 | 2nd Roundup Verdict Goes Against Monsanto 10-23-18 | Judge Reduces $289 Million Award, Denies Monsanto Retrial Request 08-28-18 | $289 Million Roundup Verdict; Monsanto Faces 8,000 More Cases 07-12-18 | Roundup Cancer Lawsuits Can Move Forward you may be able to work with a law firm on a contingency basis This means you will only be required to pay if the legal team secures a settlement or verdict on your behalf Non-Hodgkin's Lymphoma (NHL) is a form of lymphatic system cancer linked to Roundup and glyphosate exposure the lymphatic system transports infection-fighting white blood cells throughout the body some of those white blood cells turn into tumors NHL can affect multiple parts of the lymphatic system (shown above) Each form of NHL may cause unique symptoms But people with NHL commonly experience the following symptoms: The Mayo Clinic advises anyone experiencing worrisome NHL symptoms to make an appointment with a physician a physician will confirm the NHL diagnosis Stage II: Cancer cells are found in either two lymph node areas or one lymph node and a nearby organ; cancer cells are still found in only one bodily section either above or below the diaphragm (not both) Stage III: Cancer cells are found above and below the diaphragm they prescribe the appropriate course of treatment for each patient's specific type of NHL When physicians determine that a particular patient's NHL progresses slowly (indolent NHL) they may not immediately prescribe a treatment patients typically experience few to zero symptoms from their NHL Doctors will usually schedule periodic checkups for indolent NHL This allows patients to undergo treatment if and when symptoms arise without subjecting them to unnecessary medical interventions For patients experiencing symptoms from NHL doctors may prescribe traditional cancer treatments like chemotherapy and radiation Doctors may also recommend bone marrow transplants The five-year survival rates for NHL range from 55% to 95% depending on the specific type and grade of NHL You can learn more about specific survival rates from Cancer.org >>> Thousands of lawsuits have been filed against Roundup manufacturers Monsanto and Bayer many claiming that the popular weed killer caused the plaintiff's non-Hodgkin's lymphoma But does a weed killer found on the shelves of most grocery stores really cause cancer Scientific studies completed by independent scientists seem to find a link between high levels of glyphosate exposure and NHL Studies completed by individuals with ties to Monsanto seem unable to find such a link researchers analyzed 44 different scientific publications covering 32 years worth of data on NHL and pesticide exposure These researchers found a relationship between glyphosate exposure and B cell lymphoma Glyphosate is the active ingredient in Roundup weed killer a study of Swedish citizens who were exposed to a number of pesticides came to a similar conclusion After analyzing data from nearly 2,000 individuals researchers concluded glyphosate exposure doubled an individual's likelihood of developing NHL researchers at the University of Washington examined the relationship between NHL and high They concluded that high exposure to glyphosate increased a person's risk of NHL by 41% Several Monsanto-affiliated studies have concluded there is insufficient evidence to confirm a link between NHL and glyphosate exposure For more information on glyphosate studies and possible bias, read the scientific study section below The molecule at the center of the Roundup debate is a pretty small one glyphosate has caused big problems for consumers who used it but it's causing big problems for Monsanto and Bayer A Monsanto chemist discovered the plant-killing properties of glyphosate nearly half a century ago this small molecule inhibits an enzyme necessary for growing plants to stay alive glyphosate presented a number of attractive properties Plants could absorb it easily through their leaves though they would not absorb glyphosate through their roots This meant that farmers or gardeners could apply glyphosate to plants they wanted to kill without worrying that it would seep into the ground and kill important most plants were highly susceptible to glyphosate poisoning as long as they were actively growing Monsanto brought glyphosate to market as a broad-spectrum herbicide in 1974 but its popularity didn't truly skyrocket until the introduction of Roundup Ready crops Roundup Ready crops were engineered with immunity to glyphosate So farmers could effectively blanket their crops with glyphosate and kill only unwanted weeds Learn more about Roundup Ready crops >>> The practice of spraying crops with glyphosate created controversy when laboratory tests revealed glyphosate contamination in a number of food products If people consume glyphosate in their food on a daily basis Government regulations address acute exposure to toxic levels of glyphosate not long-term exposure to food-borne glyphosate experts caution that legal does not mean safe former Director of the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS) highlighted this issue in an editorial for scientific journal PLOS Biology: "[Low-level] exposures pose unique risks to children at critical windows of development--risks that existing regulations fail to consider." Individuals who choose to exercise caution regarding glyphosate in their food can try to avoid the contaminated foods listed below Despite thousands of lawsuits claiming glyphosate-containing Roundup caused a variety of cancers Regulatory agencies worldwide have come to different conclusions regarding glyphosate's potential for causing cancer and juries have been forced to weigh the evidence on both sides Glyphosate proponents are quick to point out the IARC classifies a number of things as possibly carcinogenic to humans Glyphosate critics observe that Monsanto had clear ties to the EPA when the agency made its determination Learn more about Monsanto, the EPA and the IARC >> scientists have not come to an agreement about the carcinogenicity of glyphosate Studies investigating the relationship between any kind of glyphosate exposure and cancer typically find no link between the two researchers who study heavy glyphosate exposure and cancer have found that heavy glyphosate exposure leads to between a 40% and 200% increased risk of developing non-Hodgkin's lymphoma Monsanto's legal team attempts to focus all proceedings on scientific studies that have found no link between Roundup/glyphosate and non-Hodgkin's lymphoma (NHL) Plaintiff's legal teams have thus far attempted to focus on studies showing an increased risk of NHL after heavy glyphosate exposure Plaintiffs' lawyers have also presented evidence of Monsanto's efforts (some successful) to plant pro-glyphosate studies in an effort to sway public and legal perception in favor of Roundup Learn more about Monsanto's efforts to influence scientific literature >>> At this point, neither scientists nor regulators have a conclusive answer regarding glyphosate's carcinogenicity. According to consumer advocacy group U.S. Right to Know Monsanto has never publicly acknowledged performing a long-term test of Roundup carcinogenicity plaintiff's lawyers questioned Sam Murphey on the topic of Roundup's long-term cancer-causing potential Murphey claimed he did not know the cost of such a test Only time will tell if Bayer will use some portion of Roundup's $1.9 billion in gross profits (in 2015) to provide its own evidence of glyphosate's safety herbicidal qualities--such as its status as a non-selective chemical herbicide with almost non-existent root absorption--it was not an optimal weed killer on its own some plants have natural resistance or tolerance to glyphosate Consumers can buy Roundup in multiple different glyphosate concentrations this resistance came in the form of enhanced external barriers if glyphosate couldn't get through the leaf to the inside of the plant Monsanto solved this issue by adding a number of chemicals to the Roundup cocktail all intended to maximize its weed-killing efficiency Many of the non-glyphosate chemicals increase Roundup's ability to go through external barriers like the skin of plant foliage This type of chemical is called a surfactant some surfactants increase the lethality of glyphosate-containing substances by up to 100x Some studies have even speculated the additives in Roundup pose more danger to humans than glyphosate itself Some of the successful lawsuits have argued the specific Roundup formulation may have acted similarly on human skin as it did on plants increasing the rate and amount of glyphosate entering the bloodstream this assertion could directly implicate Roundup as the culprit in making it possible for glyphosate to cause NHL Similar to the controversy surrounding glyphosate lawsuits scientists and regulatory bodies disagree on the safety of these additives Regardless of the ultimate determination on Roundup additive safety one thing remains clear: glyphosate is a component of Roundup but Roundup is much more than glyphosate alone Monsanto patented glyphosate as a weed killer in 1970 and held that patent until 2000 They had a virtual monopoly on the herbicide for more than a quarter of a century they developed an entire line of glyphosate-based products as well as crops specifically engineered with immunity to glyphosate Roundup consists of glyphosate and a number of additives designed to maximize weed-killing efficacy Surfactants help glyphosate pass through plant cell walls Preservatives ensure glyphosate stays active despite extended time on the shelf between uses native crops do not have natural resistance to glyphosate This makes them especially susceptible to Roundup because additives increase its weed-killing efficacy but careless Roundup application had the potential to decimate crops Roundup's efficacy and potential to damage income-producing crops represented a colossal opportunity for its manufacturer If Monsanto could create crops immune to glyphosate they could sell farmers on the ease represented by using these crops in conjunction with Roundup Farmers would no longer need to worry about careful application of herbicide knowing it would kill only unwanted weeds without harming valuable crops Monsanto set to work genetically engineering crops with glyphosate resistance began hitting the market in the late 1990s From the time Roundup Ready crops were introduced through 2016 global glyphosate usage increased more than 15x 72% of glyphosate usage in that same time period occurred in the United States unsealed documents and emails emerged suggesting Monsanto ghost wrote several scientific studies The emails indicate Monsanto wanted to ensure regulatory bodies Roundup cancer lawyers claim company executives worked with a former EPA employee to refute claims that glyphosate was dangerous and tried to squash an investigation of the herbicide Monsanto allegedly received notice of the herbicide's evaluation months before it was made public allowing them to prepare for a public relations attack against studies supporting a cancer link Data generated by academics has always been a major concern for us Documents uncovered during the discovery process in early Roundup lawsuits have revealed a number of questionable Monsanto actions The consumer advocate organization US Right to Know obtained most of these documents through public records request and made them available on their website as a public service show Monsanto used three tactics in attempts to manipulate public perception of Roundup: The World Health Organization's (WHO's) International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) reviewed published data investigating the association between glyphosate and non-Hodgkin's Lymphoma IARC classified glyphosate as a probable human carcinogen in March 2015 possibly anticipating the role IARC's classification could play in legal proceedings The pro-glyphosate task force developed and executed a number of tactics aimed at discrediting the scientists and regulators involved in IARC's decision According to a taped deposition from Sam Murphey Monsanto dedicated $16 to 17 million to anti-IARC and glyphosate-related "media relations" in one year alone insisted none of these actions amounted to anything unethical or "nefarious." According to him and the right context and perspective on the science - in [the media's] coverage - of [their] product." Documents indicate Monsanto began working with the EPA in 2015 to stall a potentially damaging report underway at the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR) ATSDR announced plans to complete and publish a review of glyphosate just prior to the release of IARC's report classifying glyphosate as a probable human carcinogen According to strings of emails and text messages Monsanto began communicating with high-level officials at multiple government agencies in April 2015 approximately one month after the IARC decision the National Center for Environmental Health (NCEH) and the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) would work directly with Monsanto officials all attempting to shut down the potential new glyphosate report coming out of ATSDR Monsanto officials pushed a fairly consistent narrative through their contacts at the EPA They informed ATSDR officials the EPA was doing its own report and wanted to make sure the two agencies did not waste government funds by duplicating work Monsanto and its government contacts continued pushing back against alleged duplication of work Monsanto's US Agency Lead for Regulatory Affairs informed his colleagues that ATSDR had officially put their glyphosate assessment on hold until the EPA could release its preliminary risk assessment the EPA has yet to release a risk assessment on glyphosate the EPA's Cancer Assessment Review Committee finalized an internal report "not likely to be carcinogenic to humans." The United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) does not directly regulate the use of glyphosate the FDA does regulate glyphosate residue left on domestic and imported foods the EPA determines which pesticides are safe for human health and the environment The FDA then enforces the limits set by the EPA the FDA quotes information provided by other agencies: Environmental Protection Agency. Glyphosate Environmental Protection Agency. EPA Releases Draft Risk Assessments for Glyphosate Field E. Monsanto Faces 8,000 Glyphosate Suits, Bayer CEO Says Gonzales R. Jury Awards $80 Million In Damages In Roundup Weed Killer Cancer Trial Grossman, Elizabeth. What Do We Really Know About Roundup Weed Killer? National Geographic Hakim, Danny. Monsanto Weed Killer Roundup Faces New Doubts on Safety in Unsealed Documents Hiar, Corbin. Under fire by U.S. politicians, World Health Organization defends its claim that an herbicide causes cancer International Agency for Research on Cancer. IARC Monographs Volume 112: evaluation of five organophosphate insecticides and herbicides Monsanto. Monsanto did not ghostwrite the Williams et al (2000) glyphosate paper Steitz C, Weiss P, Bellon T. Bayer could be close to Roundup settlement, mediator says Stempel J., Bellon T. Bayer loses California appeal of Roundup verdict, but damages are reduced Thanawala, Sudhin. Judge delves into science behind Roundup cancer claim United States District Court, Northern District of California. In re: Roundup Products Liability Litigation (MDL No. 2741) United States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation. Case MDL No. 2741, Document 57 Wagstaff AH. First Amended Complaint Zaveri M. Monsanto Weedkiller Roundup Was ‘Substantial Factor’ in Causing Man’s Cancer, Jury Says Learn about your legal options and get free evaluations from attorneys experienced with product liability and personal injury cases The information on ConsumerSafety.org is provided for informational purposes only and is not intended to provide specific legal advice This website does not provide medical advice A jury returned a defense verdict on Friday in the seventh Roundup trial in the Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas Monsanto won another court victory in the Roundup litigation on Friday after jurors in Philadelphia returned a defense verdict who in 2015 began using Roundup several times a year before she was diagnosed in 2019 with non-Hodgkin lymphoma of Chicago’s Goldman Ismail Tomaselli Brennan & Baum and Philadelphia attorneys Richard Harris of Holland & Knight and Barnes & Thornburg's Chanda Miller The Legal Intelligencer Already have an account? Sign In City Council and agriculture giant Monsanto and two smaller companies The City Council on Tuesday announced the payout by the companies to settle a lawsuit filed in 2022 over damages from long-banned chemicals called PCBs which have been linked to health problems including cancer The City Council approved the settlement at Tuesday afternoon’s meeting Councilmembers Imelda Padilla and Nithya Raman were absent Hydee Feldstein Soto was not immediately answered Monsanto confirmed the agreement Wednesday morning saying in a statement that the settlement contains no admission of liability or wrongdoing Monsanto said it ceased producing PCBs in 1977 and never manufactured or disposed of PCBs in the Los Angeles area which was swallowed by the German corporation Bayer in 2018 and smaller chemical companies Solutia Inc The complaint sought compensation for the cost of past cleanups — and for future abatement — of polychlorinated biphenyls The chemicals tainted and continue to pollute many Los Angeles waterways “The city has expended millions and millions of dollars so far and is going to continue to expend millions and millions of dollars to remediate this issue,” Feuer said at the time PCBs are human-made organic chemicals that have no known taste or smell and range in consistency from oils to waxes, according to the Environmental Protection Agency. California The lawsuit seeks compensation for past and future costs of dealing with contamination from long-banned chemicals called PCBs PCBs were produced and used domestically from roughly 1929 until they were banned in 1979 From the 1930s through 1977, Monsanto was the sole producer of PCBs in the United States, according to the National Library of Medicine. Exposure to PCBs increases the chances of a person developing cancer while diminishing the effectiveness of the immune system and damaging reproductive organs and the nervous system, according to the EPA. The lawsuit alleged that Monsanto knew that “its commercial PCB formulations were highly toxic and would inevitably produce precisely the contamination and human health risks that have occurred.” Instead of informing public officials, the company “misled the public, regulators, and its own customers about these key facts.” The lawsuit alleged that, as early as 1937, Monsanto acknowledged internally that PCBs produced “systemic toxic effects upon prolonged exposure.” Monsanto said in a statement it has “conducted hundreds of studies on PCB safety, provided appropriate warnings to its customers based on the state of the science at the time, and has committed to participation in agency processes where it has been determined to be a potentially responsible party.” Climate & Environment California air regulators have voted to phase out the use of a highly toxic metal that’s commonly used to restore classic cars and protect aviation parts Many of Los Angeles’ waterways had been impaired by PCB contamination The city has said that it continues to shoulder the cost and responsibility of cleaning these locales along with monitoring and analyzing samples or drinking or swimming in contaminated water Fish captured in contaminated waters and eaten also provide an avenue for PCB exposure Seattle announced a $160-million settlement with Monsanto in July over PCBs in the city’s drainage system and rivers In May, however, an appeals court in Washington state overturned a $185-million verdict against Monsanto in a lawsuit brought by three teachers who claimed brain damage due to PCB leaks. El Segundo still stinks. Why can’t L.A. fix the problem three years after huge sewage spill? Dec. 16, 2024 Updates 11:30 a.m. Sept. 25, 2024: The story has been updated with a statement from Monsanto. Andrew J. Campa is a member of the Fast Break team at the Los Angeles Times, having previously covered the Eastside and San Gabriel Valley. Before, he worked at several medium and small daily newspapers and has covered education, sports and general news. He’s a proud University of Alabama (#RollTide), Cal State Fullerton and Pasadena City College alumnus. World & Nation Subscribe for unlimited access Site Map The case at the heart of the new ruling is one of more than 100,000 brought in US courts This story was originally published in The New Lede a journalism project of the Environmental Working Group An Oregon appeals court on Wednesday overturned a trial victory by Monsanto owner Bayer AG in a decision that adds to an ongoing debate over the company’s efforts to create a nationwide legal and legislative shield from lawsuits alleging Roundup weed killer causes cancer The court found that the trial judge in the case improperly barred key evidence about the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) from being presented to the jury which could have led the jury to find in favor of the plaintiff the court rejected arguments by the company that claims about the dangers of its products should be barred because those products carry the EPA’s stamp of approval Other courts have similarly rejected so-called “preemption” arguments by Bayer, which bought Monsanto in 2018. But after failing to get court backing, Bayer has been pushing state and federal lawmakers to give it and other pesticide makers the protection the courts have rejected A proposed measure is being considered by lawmakers for inclusion in the US Farm Bill Monsanto unsuccessfully argued to the appeals court that the case never should have even gone to a jury because the claims should have been preempted Bayer did not respond to a request for comment on the latest ruling said he welcomed the court’s decision and was eager to retry the case with the evidence about the EPA included The testimony that the trial judge refused to allow was from Charles Benbrook, a former research professor who served at one time as executive director of the National Academy of Sciences board on agriculture. Benbrook has authored papers critical of the EPA’s handling of glyphosate herbicides noting that the agency has given little weight to independent research regarding the actual products sold into the marketplace and used by millions of people around the world the EPA has mostly relied on studies paid for by Monsanto and other companies selling glyphosate herbicides that found no cancer concerns “There is important new science to share with the jury that clarifies why and how Roundup can cause cancer,” Benbrook said this week after learning of the court ruling Excluding Benbrook’s testimony was an error that “was not harmless,” the appellate court said in its decision “Monsanto defended itself by claiming it satisfied the EPA regulations Benbrook’s testimony would have helped the jury understand the applicable regulatory framework—what the EPA does and does not do what manufacturers like Monsanto are obligated to do no witness for Plaintiff addressed the regulatory framework Such testimony would have been relevant to Plaintiff’s theory of the case and qualitatively different from the other evidence presented,” the Oregon appellate court found “There is important new science to share with the jury that clarifies why and how Roundup can cause cancer.” - Charles Benbrook The EPA’s handling of Monsanto and its glyphosate products has been the subject of much scrutiny in recent years as internal documents have revealed many questionable interactions and secretive dealings that critics say undermine the credibility of the agency’s oversight In 2022, a federal court found that the EPA had failed to follow established guidelines for determining cancer risk and discounted expert advice from a scientific advisory panel in its oversight of glyphosate Bayer has either been ordered by juries – or agreed in settlements – to pay out billions of dollars in damages to many of the plaintiffs But the company has also won several cases at trial, including the Oregon case that is the subject of this week’s ruling The plaintiff in that case is Oregon resident Larry Johnson who started using glyphosate-based Roundup in the 1990s to kill weeds around his home Johnson continued using Roundup for more than 20 years until being diagnosed with NHL in 2019 as have other plaintiffs in the ongoing Roundup litigation that Monsanto long knew of scientific studies connecting its glyphosate-based herbicides to cancer and should have warned customers about the risks The lawsuits claim that Monsanto engaged in a number of fraudulent activities to conceal evidence of the cancer connection including ghostwriting studies to perpetuate its claims that the products are safe and engaging in secret dealings with the EPA to protect its ability to sell glyphosate-based products Monsanto cites the EPA’s determination that glyphosate is “not likely” to cause cancer in its defense and asserts that the Federal Insecticide and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) preempts state-law claims because the EPA has approved the labels on Roundup and other glyphosate products label without the need for a cancer warning But the appeals court became the latest of several courts to rebuff that argument by Monsanto Monsanto “relies on the EPA’s approval of the Roundup label and asserts that that approval – which does not include a cancer warning – preempts plaintiff’s claims,” the court states in its ruling in our view… the EPA’s approval of a label under FIFRA does not preempt state law claims.” FIFRA specifically allows for states to have a role in pesticide regulation for products sold within their boundaries unless the use of the product is prohibited by FIFRA The court noted that along with banning Benbrook’s testimony the trial judge – at Monsanto’s request – specifically instructed the jury in the case to take EPA oversight into account The court ordered that the trial win for Monsanto was “reversed and remanded.” A new trial is not automatically triggered by the ruling – Monsanto owner Bayer can ask for reconsideration by the appellate court and could seek a review by the Oregon Supreme Court But Kirkendall said he was confident his client would get another day in court Nonprofit organizations MADE SAFE and Plastic Pollution Coalition released the new Healthy Pregnancy Guideto help parents-to-be navigate the challenges of making healthier living choices for babies and the planet. Your support of EHN, a newsroom powered by Environmental Health Sciences, drives science into public discussions. When you support our work, you support impactful journalism. It all improves the health of our communities. Thank you! and that it is committed to defending itself at trial unless it settles.Bayer bought Monsanto for $63 billion in 2018 It has also faced extensive and costly litigation over whether Monsanto's Roundup weed killer causes cancer.The case is Seattle v 16-00107.Reporting by Jonathan Stempel in New York; editing by Diane Craft Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles., opens new tab , opens new tab Browse an unrivalled portfolio of real-time and historical market data and insights from worldwide sources and experts. , opens new tabScreen for heightened risk individual and entities globally to help uncover hidden risks in business relationships and human networks. © 2025 Reuters. All rights reserved Since the early 2000s, the city and the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District have spent millions of dollars cleaning up carcinogenic chemicals from its sewers and waterways That's according to an ongoing lawsuit filed by the sewerage district and the City of Milwaukee against Monsanto, the chemical manufacturer now owned by the German company Bayer. The lawsuit alleges that Monsanto promoted and sold polychlorinated biphenyls throughout the 1950s to 1970s while concealing the health risks posed by the chemicals PCBs are man-made chemicals once commonly used in flame retardants Monsanto ceased production of PCBs in 1976, but several states and cities have filed lawsuits claiming that the improper disposal of the chemicals led to long-term and life-threatening environmental impacts "Someone else caused that contamination," said Katherine Lazarski director of the sewerage district's legal services division "The tax and ratepayers of the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District shouldn't be cleaning up all of the messes made in the past." a Bayer spokesperson said the city's lawsuit was narrowed in scope during the early stages of the case and Bayer believes that the remaining legal claims "lack merit." "Monsanto never manufactured PCBs in or near Wisconsin discontinued its own legal production of PCBs nearly five decades ago conducted hundreds of studies on PCB safety and provided appropriate warnings to its customers based on the state of the science at the time," the spokesperson wrote The sewerage district's 49-page complaint presents a contradicting story including examples of internal company memos and studies by Monsanto that indicate that the company was aware of the environmental financial and human risks of the chemicals finding their way into households waterways and foods but chose to continue business anyway Recent studies indicate that chronic exposure to PCBs can cause a variety of health concerns Other potential health effects include liver damage reproductive health issues and fetal development problems Researchers have also found learning and memory problems in some children who were exposed to PCBs before birth People are most commonly exposed to PCBs by eating fish or shellfish from polluted waterways Exposure can also occur due to inhalation or skin contact with soil or dust that contains PCBs PCBs are undetectable by smell and taste and are highly resistant to degradation Removal and disposal of the chemicals is extensive and costly Lawsuit aims to recoup costs of PCB contamination in Milwaukee areaThe Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District and the city claim that PCB contamination throughout the area's riverfronts and waterways has limited opportunities for tourism The sewerage district is a regional government agency that serves 28 municipalities and over 1 million people across the Greater Milwaukee area approximately 99% of the PCBs sold in the United States were manufactured by Monsanto Monsanto then sold the PCBs to other industrial companies which used the chemicals in their own products Since the 2000s, the chemicals have been identified seeping into sewers, soil and sediment at numerous locations throughout the Milwaukee area, like the now-abandoned Milwaukee Die Casting Facility The city's lawsuit identifies the lower portions of the Milwaukee River Lincoln Creek and the inner and outer harbor as contaminated areas The total cost of PCB cleanup in these areas is estimated at more than $300 million Environmental Protection Agency and state Department of Natural Resources have already funded the removal of hundreds of thousands of cubic yards of contaminated sediment from the Milwaukee River Estuary The sediment has been stored in the Combined Disposal Facility north of the Lake Express ferry dock, but the facility is almost at capacity. To accommodate future cleanups, the sewerage district is building a new facility in the harbor that will cost an estimated $100 million The lawsuit also alleges that PCBs were detected in 2007 in the fertilizer known as Milorganite which the sewerage district makes from recycled waste and uses in parks and athletic fields Cleanup from that alone cost $5 million and the district continues to test its Milorganite for PCBs every day Lazarski said PCB costs will continue to grow in coming years This is not the first time the city of Milwaukee has considered joining a lawsuit against Monsanto for PCB contamination the City of Long Beach and several other local governments settled a class action suit against Monsanto over PCBs agreed to pay out approximately $537 million to class members Wisconsin-based attorneys, including several currently serving in the sewerage district case, identified 135 Wisconsin municipalities that could have identified as class members in the settlement. Dozens of them agreed to receive money from the settlement waiving their right to file suit in the future The City of Milwaukee declined to participate Monsanto continues to face litigation over PCBs from other states and municipalities. Last year, the company settled lawsuits with the City of Seattle and the City of Los Angeles for millions of dollars the city's case against Monsanto is in the discovery process issue subpoenas and take depositions of potential witnesses The next status hearing for the case is scheduled for May 2026 The Milwaukee River Estuary one of 31 places in Wisconsin designated as an "area of concern" where PCBs are one of the primary contaminants The lower Fox River, another "area of concern," was the subject of one of the largest and most divisive PCB cleanup projects in history. That cleanup was declared complete in 2020 However, monitoring the conditions of the river and the lingering effects on humans and wildlife continues This story was updated because an earlier version included an inaccuracy due to an editing error Tamia Fowlkes is a Public Investigator reporter for the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel. She can be reached at tfowlkes@gannett.com Caitlin Looby of the Milwaukee Journal contributed to this story In what is being called a significant victory for Mexico Monsanto has withdrawn its legal challenge against the 2020 presidential decree aimed at banning glyphosate and genetically modified (GM) corn for human consumption The National Council of Humanities, Sciences and Technologies (Conahcyt) heralded the decision as “a triumph for life, health and food sovereignty.” Semillas y Agroproductos Monsanto and Monsanto Comercial one of several glyphosate-based products that are used in the cultivation of genetically modified organisms (GMO) such as Roundup Ready corn A common genetic modification makes crops resistant to glyphosate allowing farmers to apply large amounts of the weed-killer to GMO crops The legal battle was initiated in response to President Andrés Manuel López Obrador’s 2020 decree to ban the widely used but controversial herbicide which the World Health Organization (WHO) has classified as a “probable carcinogen,” though its safety remains a subject of debate the majority of the cases concluded with rulings unfavorable to the corporations involved Conahcyt provided scientific and legal defenses presenting more than 250 pieces of evidence to support the decree Judge Francisco Rebolledo Peña’s July 2022 ruling in favor of Monsanto was appealed by the Ministry of the Environment and Natural Resources (Semarnat) the Federal Commission for Protection against Sanitary Risks (Cofepris) and Conahcyt Monsanto’s retreat is not its first legal setback The company has faced extensive litigation in the United States paying billions in punitive damages and settlements linked to glyphosate’s carcinogenic risks Internal documents revealed during the trials in Mexico indicated that Monsanto was aware of glyphosate’s cancer risks and engaged in misleading scientific practices and discrediting independent researchers The 2020 decree was replaced by a 2023 decree which reaffirmed the initial ban and introduced additional restrictions on GM corn That led to Mexico also facing anger from the United States which was not happy over Mexico’s plan to ban the importation of GM corn for use in dough and tortillas by 2024 then gradually phase out imports of GM corn for any kind of human consumption and then for use as animal feed In 2023, the U.S. government announced it had requested the establishment of a dispute settlement panel to resolve the issue. Monsanto also wanted to suspend the 2023 decree, and a few months ago, Mexico seemed to be giving in a bit when it postponed the glyphosate ban citing lack of available alternatives. In shooting down Monsanto’s latest legal challenges Judge Elizabeth Trejo Galán emphasized the precedence of public over private interest Conahcyt noted in a press release that it continues to support alternative agricultural practices and bioinputs highlighting their effectiveness in various regions Noting that the legal victory over Monsanto underscores Mexico’s commitment to safeguarding public health and environmental integrity Conahcyt vowed to continue its efforts to ensure that GM corn and glyphosate are removed from the Mexican food supply ADVERTISE WITH MND COMMUNITY GUIDELINES Subscription FAQ's Privacy Policy Mexico News Daily - Property of Tavana LLC Bayer and Monsanto are currently facing about 54,000 lawsuits filed by consumers who were exposed to the weedkiller Roundup (glyphosate) These lawsuits were filed by home gardeners and professional groundskeepers or landscapers who were exposed to Roundup and diagnosed with non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma or other illnesses Individuals who were exposed to Roundup or other weed killers containing the herbicide glyphosate and later diagnosed with non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma may also be eligible to file a lawsuit and receive compensation for their illness Roundup Linked to Non-Hodgkin’s Lymphoma Roundup is a weed killer (or herbicide) developed by the Monsanto Company in the 1970s Roundup eventually became the most widely-used herbicide and weed killer in the entire world commonly used both by plant-care professionals and home gardeners Monsanto eventually began marketing a line of genetically-modified “Roundup ready” seeds that were designed to be resistant to the effects of glyphosate In 2015, a study by the World Health Organization (WHO) found that Roundup and other glyphosate weedkillers were “probably carcinogenic” to humans Another study published in 2019 found that users who were exposed to Roundup or glyphosate were 41% more likely to be diagnosed with non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma Non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma (NHL) is a form of cancer that effects the lymphatic system and vessels that helps protect the body from infection Patients with non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma develop tumors in their lymphocytes This evidence linking Roundup to an increased risk of lymphoma or other cancers prompted thousands of lawsuits to be filed against Monsanto and Bayer The lawsuits alleged that Monsanto knew about the cancer risks associated with Roundup for decades but failed to warn consumers about the risks they faced from using this product Many of the Roundup lawsuits against Monsanto and Bayer were filed by farmers or private homeowners who were exposed to glyphosate while caring for their plants or lawns The first Roundup lawsuits to go to trial was filed by a retired groundskeeper in California who alleged that he developed non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma after being regularly exposed to Roundup on the job The jury in that case eventually awarded the groundskeeper $78 million in damages after it unanimously agreed that Roundup caused his lymphoma diagnosis Bayer and Monsanto have been ordered to pay about $11 billion in combined damages to individuals who were diagnosed with lymphoma or other cancers after being exposed to Roundup or glyphosate Roundup Users With Lymphoma May Qualify to File a Lawsuit More than 100,000 Roundup lawsuits in total have been filed against Bayer and Monsanto The companies estimate that they are currently facing about 54,000 remaining lawsuits involving Roundup and cancer including about 49,000 federal lawsuits and 5,000 claims that are part of a class action lawsuit in California Individuals who used Roundup or other weed killers containing the herbicide glyphosate and were diagnosed with non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma may be eligible to join the Roundup litigation and receive a settlement for their illness The first step in taking legal action is to contact an experienced product liability attorney who can users who were exposed to Roundup determine whether they qualify to file a claim and help them gather all of the relevant evidence to help prove their claim in court See more » Refine your interests » Back to Top Explore 2025 Readers' Choice Awards Copyright © var today = new Date(); var yyyy = today.getFullYear();document.write(yyyy + " "); JD Supra Link IconCopy linkFacebook LogoShare on FacebookXShare on XEmailShare via EmailLink copied to clipboardPhiladelphia jury awards $78 million to Abington man who said Roundup weed killer gave him cancerThe verdict is the sixth by a Philadelphia jury that considered a Roundup case A Philadelphia jury delivered a $78 million verdict Thursday against agricultural giant Monsanto was a reason an Abington man developed blood cancer used Roundup frequently for nearly three decades starting in 1992 He was diagnosed in 2020 with non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma which he argued in legal filings was the result of his exposure to chemicals in the product sued Monsanto and its German parent company in 2021 in the Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas The lawsuit is one of thousands of cases nationally in which people who developed cancer accuse Monsanto of negligence for failing to include adequate warnings about its weed killer product Philadelphia juries have returned verdicts for and against Monsanto in previous trials described a company that allegedly manipulated evidence and concealed information about the potential dangers of its product for half a century “When a company fails to tell the truth about their products the company needs to be held accountable,” he told the jury in his opening statement on the first day of the trial in mid-September a Los Angeles-based partner at the Proskauer Rose firm told the jury that the trial wasn’t about the company’s history but whether Roundup was a cause in Melissen’s cancer specifically “This case is not a class action,” Williams reiterated in his closing remarks The attorney presented to the jury transcripts from testimony by Melissen and his treating physician that showed that the Abington man’s cancer is in remission and that he was treated in one five-day round of chemotherapy Kline told the jurors in his closing argument that they have the ability to reach the CEO and boardroom of an international multibillion dollar corporation by awarding punitive damages which are meant to punish the company for its conduct He asked the jurors to return a verdict in “Monsanto dollars.” The jurors reached a verdict after less than three hours of deliberations Thursday afternoon The jury awarded Melissen $3 million dollars in compensatory damages and $75 million in punitive damages “This is one more jury that recognized the outrageous conduct of Monsanto for 50 years,” Kline told The Inquirer after the verdict reading who litigated the case on behalf of Monsanto Monsanto said in a statement that it disagrees with the jury’s verdict and that evidence doesn’t support the claim that Roundup causes cancer It also said that the trial errors provided the company strong grounds for appeal Among the alleged errors in the case was that the case wasn’t dismissed following an August decision by three judges on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit who ruled that Pennsylvania state law cannot require a more expansive pesticide warning label than the one approved by the Environmental Protection Agency Monsanto used that ruling to ask a state appeals court to halt the Melissen trial before it started Thousands of lawsuits have been filed against Bayer and Monsanto alleging the glyphosate in their Roundup® weed killer may cause cancer Billions of dollars have already been paid to victims nationwide At Sokolove Law, we’re here to provide families with the latest Roundup litigation updates as these cases progress. Call (800) 995-1212 now to see if we can help you file a claim for compensation about 170,000 Roundup claims have been filed The majority of these claims allege that victims developed various types of non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma as a result of exposure to the herbicide At Sokolove Law, we have over 45 years of experience holding powerful companies like Bayer and Monsanto accountable. Our firm has already helped hundreds of families seek justice from Roundup lawsuits There are no upfront costs or hourly fees to work with our Roundup attorneys Contact us now to see if we can pursue the compensation you deserve Sokolove Law has secured over $9.8 Billion total for thousands of clients nationwide Families across the country have filed Roundup claims against Bayer and Monsanto seeking justice for cancer caused by glyphosate weed killers billions of dollars have been paid out to victims and their loved ones we’re committed to providing you with the latest Roundup claim updates Find out more about what's going on with current developments in the Roundup litigation Latest Roundup Litigation Update | April 14 A jury in Georgia ordered Bayer to pay more than $2 Billion to John Barnes who was diagnosed with non-Hodgkin's lymphoma after using Roundup on weeds around his home for over 20 years The verdict included $65 Million in compensatory damages to help Barnes with expenses linked to his illness and $2 Billion in punitive damages to punish Bayer for their negligence Monsanto Roundup Litigation Update | March 14 The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals is reviewing whether to revive a proposed Roundup class action lawsuit involving the lack of an expiration date on these products This class action was previously dismissed by a lower court in 2023 Plaintiffs argue that glyphosate in Roundup can break down into the carcinogen N-nitrosogyphosate when exposed to nitrites in air and water consumers may unknowingly use degraded products that pose a risk to their health are considering bills that would shield Bayer from Roundup claims This legislation would limit failure to warn claims making it harder for those diagnosed with cancer to seek justice Supporters argue these bills are necessary to protect the agricultural industry while opponents believe they grant Bayer immunity and prevent victims from being able to hold the company accountable for their illnesses Roundup Cancer Lawsuit Update | January 13 Monsanto has asked the Pennsylvania Superior Court to overturn an October 2023 verdict that awarded $175 Million to Ernest Caranci a home gardener who claimed he developed cancer from using Roundup The company alleges that the jury’s decision was influenced by a court officer who pressured them into reaching a verdict They also claim the judge wrongfully excluded evidence that was critical to their defense Monsanto Roundup Litigation Update | December 1 Multiple Roundup claims have examined if federal law overrides state-based failure to warn claims in Roundup cancer lawsuits This issue has created a split among federal appellate courts prompting Monsanto to look toward the Supreme Court The company is currently reviewing cases that could be suitable to submit to the U.S the Court would likely decide the matter during the 2025-2026 session Roundup Cancer Lawsuit Update | November 15 determining that the company was not liable for Judith Womack’s non-Hodgkin's lymphoma diagnosis who used Roundup several times in a residential setting starting in 2015 Despite previously settling thousands of lawsuits Bayer is still facing approximately 58,000 active Roundup cancer claims More than 4,300 of these claims have been consolidated into a Roundup class action lawsuit or multidistrict litigation while the remainder are pending across various state courts A Pennsylvania jury ordered Bayer to pay William Melissen and his wife Margaret $78 Million William developed a form of non-Hodgkin's lymphoma after using Roundup at his home and work between 1992 and 2020 The verdict included $3 Million in compensatory damages and $75 Million in punitive damages meant to punish the company Monsanto Roundup Litigation Update | October 8 This marks the sixth Roundup cancer lawsuit to go before a jury in Philadelphia Monsanto previously attempted to dismiss this case before it went to trial but a judge denied the company's motion for summary judgment and allowed the case to proceed a Philadelphia jury determined that Roundup is defective but it was not the cause of Ryan Young’s non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma Young used the glyphosate-based weed killer Roundup multiple times a year starting in 1998 before being diagnosed with cancer victims have already won 3 previous trials in Philadelphia and another Roundup case is set to begin in the city by the end of September Call (800) 995-1212 now to see if we can help you seek compensation from a Roundup claim Roundup Cancer Litigation Update | August 15 The 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals in Philadelphia ruled that Monsanto is not required to add cancer warnings to Roundup labels The court agreed with Monsanto’s argument that federal law This ruling conflicts with other appeals courts throughout the country where judges have found that states can require additional warning requirements beyond federal regulations An Oregon appeals court overturned a previous trial win by Monsanto in favor of Larry Johnson who developed non-Hodgkin's lymphoma after using Roundup for over 20 years Johnson was denied the chance to present key evidence from Dr a former executive director of the National Academy of Sciences Board on Agriculture Benbrook has criticized the Environmental Protection Agency’s findings on the safety of glyphosate The appellate judges found that excluding information about the research used by the EPA to support their stance on glyphosate was a mistake This decision could allow Johnson to seek a new trial against Monsanto Bayer has lobbied Congress to include language in the Farm Bill — legislation that addresses agriculture and food programs — that would shield the company from lawsuits related to Roundup and cancer The proposed addition would make it difficult for landscapers and agricultural workers to claim Bayer failed to properly warn them about the risks associated with glyphosate in Roundup a Missouri jury awarded $1.56 Billion to three victims who claimed Roundup caused them to develop non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma The wife of one victim was also awarded $100,000 for suffering caused by her husband’s diagnosis and a judge reduced the amount to $611 Million The judge upheld the original $61.1 Million awarded in compensatory damages but slashed punitive damages which are meant to punish the company for their wrongdoing Find out if you may be eligible for a Roundup settlement or verdict a Roundup wrongful death lawsuit resulted in a mistrial after the jury was unable to reach a unanimous decision Members of the jury deliberated for three days before announcing they were deadlocked The lawsuit was brought by the family of Anthony Cloud a landscaper who passed away from non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma in 2021 His loved ones were seeking $142 Million from Monsanto for failing to warn about the risks associated with Roundup Cloud’s family will have the opportunity to pursue another lawsuit against Bayer and Monsanto in the future if they choose to do so Monsanto Roundup Lawsuit Update | February 5 more than 4,200 Roundup claims have been consolidated in the U.S District Court for the Northern District of California The number of claims in the Roundup class action lawsuit or multidistrict litigation (MDL) has continued to grow Bayer has been ordered to pay $2.25 Billion to John McKivison a Pennsylvania man who developed non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma after years of using Roundup for yard work This is the largest Roundup verdict against Bayer to date The jury awarded McKivison $250 Million in compensatory damages and $2 Billion in punitive damages If you were diagnosed with a Roundup-related cancer after using the weed killer We’ll handle every step of the legal process on your behalf so you can focus on your health and loved ones Our Roundup attorneys have already helped families across the country get justice Find out if you may qualify for compensation Between the previous global Roundup settlement and multiple trial verdicts Bayer has paid out billions to families impacted by cancer linked to glyphosate The latest update on Roundup settlements and verdicts include: Roundup settlements can help families pay for medical bills Call (800) 995-1212 now to find out if you may qualify for compensation from a Roundup claim The Roundup litigation has been ongoing for years Find out more about the past Roundup weed killer lawsuit updates that have helped shape recent events five Roundup trials were decided in favor of the victims juries awarded more than $2 Billion to victims and their loved ones over the course of three months Bayer has achieved their first Roundup cancer trial victory in the case of Clark v claimed the weed killer caused her child to develop Burkitt’s lymphoma The jury found that Clark’s attorney didn’t adequately establish a connection between the child’s cancer diagnosis and his exposure to Roundup Bayer agreed to resolve around 100,000 lawsuits through a $10.9 Billion Roundup settlement $2 Billion will be put aside for future claims by Roundup cancer victims Some judges have criticized this amount as insufficient suggesting it may not be enough to adequately pay victims for the harm they’ve suffered Find out if you may qualify for Roundup compensation It costs nothing to determine your eligibility Alva and Alberta Pilliod were awarded over $2 Billion by a California jury after they were both diagnosed with non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma The couple used Roundup on their residential properties for years before getting sick The verdict included $55 Million in compensatory damages and $2 Billion in punitive damages A California jury awarded $289 Million to Dewayne “Lee” Johnson He previously worked as a school groundskeeper which required him to routinely use Roundup Two years before his non-Hodgkin's lymphoma diagnosis Johnson was in an accident that doused him in the weed killer This groundbreaking verdict marks the first significant legal victory for plaintiffs in Roundup litigation highlighting concerns about the safety of glyphosate Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation consolidated multiple Roundup claims into a single multidistrict litigation (MDL) in the U.S The MDL centralizes cases alleging that glyphosate The consolidation aims to streamline the legal process and help with evidence collection The International Agency for Research on Cancer which is part of the World Health Organization classified glyphosate as "probably carcinogenic to humans." This classification was based on evidence that glyphosate can cause cancer in laboratory animals and is linked to an increased risk of non-Hodgkin's lymphoma in humans If you or a loved one was diagnosed with cancer after being exposed to Roundup contact us now to see if we may be able to pursue compensation for your family Our Roundup attorneys have already secured millions from glyphosate claims we’re committed to providing families with the latest Monsanto and Bayer Roundup claim updates our glyphosate lawyers can fight for compensation and justice on behalf of cancer victims in all 50 states We’ve helped thousands of clients stand up to negligent corporations like Bayer securing more than $9.8 Billion for those injured through no fault of their own so you can take legal action without any financial risk Call (800) 995-1212 now or fill out our contact form to get started with a free more than 100,000 Roundup claims have been settled for around $11 Billion and juries have awarded over $8 Billion in trial verdicts Around 4,400 Roundup claims are still pending against Bayer and Monsanto Find out if you may qualify to file a Roundup claim during a free case review Roundup compensation can range from tens of thousands to millions of dollars How much you may get from a Roundup claim will vary based on: we’ll fight hard to get you everything you’re entitled to Call (800) 995-1212 now Bayer has paid nearly $11 Billion in Roundup settlements to resolve approximately 100,000 claims juries have ordered the company to pay over $8 Billion in trial verdicts to victims with cancer though some verdict amounts have later been reduced on appeal your lawyer will need to prove that you were repeatedly exposed to glyphosate weed killers and later diagnosed with non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma or another qualifying cancer Evidence linking your cancer to Roundup may include: Our Roundup lawyers can gather the evidence needed to build a strong case on your behalf Exposure to glyphosate in Roundup has been linked to several types of cancer including non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma and leukemia Cancers that may be covered under the Roundup claim include: Get a free case review now if you or a loved one has been diagnosed with any of these cancers after using the weed killer You may be eligible for compensation from Roundup litigation It typically takes 1 to 2 months to receive a Roundup settlement check after your attorney has completed negotiations with Bayer While the payout timeline may vary between each case we’ll work hard to secure money for you as quickly as possible You may still be able to file a Roundup claim if you or a loved one was diagnosed with cancer linked to glyphosate you typically only have 1 to 3 years to file a Roundup claim after your diagnosis or the death of a loved one due to laws called statutes of limitations Call (800) 995-1212 now to get started before it’s too late FILE - Shipping containers line one side of the Duwamish River and barges with gravel line another chemical giant Monsanto has agreed to a $160-million settlement with Seattle for its part in polluting the Lower Duwamish River with toxins that posed a threat to humans and wildlife the city attorney’s office said in a press release Thursday FILE - Container ships are docked at the Port of Seattle along the Duwamish River SEATTLE (AP) — Ending an eight-year legal battle chemical giant Monsanto has agreed to a $160-million settlement with Seattle for its part in polluting a river that runs through the heart of the city with toxins that posed a threat to humans “We all play a role in protecting our environment and I am glad that Monsanto will contribute to this important environmental cleanup,” City Attorney Ann Davison said in a news release It’s the largest single-city settlement Monsanto has paid emptying into Puget Sound just south of downtown Water samples collected from the Lower Duwamish detected polychlorinated biphenyls which are man-made chemical compounds that were manufactured by Monsanto Although Monsanto stopped manufacturing PCBs in 1977 the chemicals continued to exist in paints stormwater flowing into the Lower Duwamish River has been continually contaminated with PCBs saying the company “was well aware” that PCBs were toxic to animals but it continued to manufacture its products “While the scientific community and Monsanto knew that PCBs were toxic and becoming a global contaminant Monsanto repeatedly misrepresented these facts telling governmental entities the exact opposite — that the compounds were not toxic and that the company would not expect to find PCBs in the environment in a widespread manner,” Seattle’s lawsuit said The settlement requires the company to pay Seattle $160 million by Aug Monsanto said in an email early Friday that $35 million of the settlement will go to PCB remediation and $125 million will go to “unique claims” related to the Seattle case The company “remains committed to defending cases at trial and will only consider settlements when it is in the Company’s interest to do so,” the statement read Under a consent decree issued by the Environmental Protection Agency and the Washington Department of Ecology the city was required to construct a stormwater treatment plant along the river to remove PCBs The cost was estimated to be about $27 million The river is listed as a Superfund Site and in 2014 the EPA estimated the total cost of cleaning it up would be $342 million The city is responsible for most of the costs The case was scheduled to go to trial in September but the city participated in a mediation that let to an unprecedented settlement amount The funds will allow Seattle Public Utilities to take further steps to protect the Duwamish which could include expanding the agency’s program that identifies sources of pollution “The settlement money will help care for the Lower Duwamish and mitigate the cost of pollution control to find and remove PCBs,” Davison said MYNORTHWEST NEWS 5:51 PM | Updated: 5:52 pm 2016 in Lillo near Antwerp shows the Monsanto logo at the firm Manufacturing Site and Operations Center BY JULIA DALLAS Pharmaceutic, chemical company Monsanto — which was acquired by pharmaceutical company Bayer — was found liable by a Washington jury for $100 million on Tuesday, according to media outlet Law360 that following a 2-month trial in the King County Superior Court the jury voiced Monsanto should pay $25 million each to four people who allege they developed illnesses from chemical exposure at a Monroe school the media outlet added the amount is far less than the $4 billion that was originally asked for by 15 plaintiffs More on MyNW: Healthcare company pays Washington more than $1M for overbilling The plaintiffs claim to have garnered health issues from polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) from aging light fixtures during their time at the Sky Valley Education Center, according to Law360. Reuters stated the chemicals were made by Monsanto students and parents said they developed cancer neurological injuries and thyroid conditions among other health issues from the chemicals Monsanto said it would appeal if necessary and pursue motions to try to overturn the verdict or reduce the $100 million amount In December, according to Courtroom View Network (CVN) the company claimed any PCBs occurred at levels too low to cause any illnesses and instead attributed the health issues to mold and poor ventilation or pre-existing conditions Monsanto also argued the amount of money asked for at the time — $30 to $50 million each for the 15 plaintiffs — was equal to “generational wealth.” CVN stated plaintiff counsel Courtney Rowley with Trial Lawyers for Justice said Monsanto knew of the health risks associated with PCBs years before taking them off the market but did not warn the public ‘Might become a delicacy:’ Beth’s Cafe, other eateries worried about growing egg shortage Bayer acquired Monsanto for $63 billion in 2018 and has since faced multiple lawsuits over PCBs including claims the company’s weedkiller Roundup caused cancer The media outlet added the lawsuits have had drastic negative effects on the company’s shares Last October Reuters reported a jury in Philadelphia found Bayer liable for $78 million to a Pennsylvania man who said he got cancer from using the company’s Roundup product Julia Dallas is a content editor at MyNorthwest. You can read her stories here. Follow Julia on X and email her here. and it has no bearing on the merits of the case We will continue to aggressively challenge this improper decision," Scott Partridge Monsanto's vice president of global strategy said.Listing glyphosate as a known carcinogen under California's Proposition 65 would require companies selling the chemical in the state to add warning labels to packaging Warnings would also be required if glyphosate is being sprayed at levels deemed unsafe by regulators.Users of the chemical include landscapers vineyards and farms.Monsanto and other glyphosate producers would have roughly a year from the listing date to re-label products or remove them from store shelves if further legal challenges are lost.Monsanto has not calculated the cost of any re-labeling effort and does not break out glyphosate sales data by state Partridge said.Environmental groups cheered OEHHA's move to list the chemical."California's decision makes it the national leader in protecting people from cancer-causing pesticides," said Nathan Donley a senior scientist at the Center for Biological Diversity.Reporting by Karl Plume in Chicago; Editing by David Gregorio Monsanto's emergency stay motion comes after the Washington Supreme Court agreed on Oct 9 to review a Washington Court of Appeals decision earlier this year reversing the first PCB verdict Monsanto has filed an emergency motion to halt a polychlorinated biphenyls trial in Seattle that starts Tuesday with jury selection The trial is the tenth involving former students teachers and parents at the Sky Valley Education Center in Monroe in the school's fluorescent light ballasts and caulk More than 200 plaintiffs tied to the school allege they have suffered neurological problems has been hit with more than $1.6 billion in verdicts during the past three years Already have an account? Sign In The Massachusetts ruling accepts a legal defense from Monsanto that has But the company recently gained new traction on the argument with a win in the U.S A Massachusetts state court ruling marks another victory for Monsanto on a legal issue that has divided courts across the national Roundup litigation Justice Salim Rodriguez Tabit of the Essex County Superior Court held Monday that federal law preempts a plaintiff's claims that Monsanto failed to warn about the alleged dangers of its weed killer Already have an account? Sign In A jury determined Wednesday that Monsanto's Roundup weedkiller was defective but the defect did not cause plaintiff Ryan Young's non-Hodgkin lymphoma Monsanto has secured its second Philadelphia Roundup verdict A jury determined Wednesday that Monsanto's Roundup weedkiller was defective It also found that neither Monsanto nor its co-defendant Already have an account? Sign In Bill McColl has 25+ years of experience as a senior producer and writer for TV and digital media leading teams of anchors covering some of the most notable news stories of the time Geography Photos / Education Images / Universal Images Group via Getty Images JUSTIA US Law. “Schaffner v. Monsanto Corporation, No. 22-3075 (3d Cir. 2024).” By Pamela King | 08/16/2024 01:19 PM EDT The ruling conflicts with findings from other federal appeals courts and may set the stage for a Supreme Court battle Glyphosate is the active ingredient in the weedkiller Roundup A federal appeals court Thursday handed Monsanto a win in its long fight against claims that the company has a duty to warn customers about health risks from its popular Roundup weedkiller Circuit Court of Appeals dismissed claims from Pennsylvania landscaper David Schaffner that Monsanto had an obligation under state law to place a cancer warning on Roundup’s label Schaffner was diagnosed with non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma in 2006 after years of working with the weedkiller on the job and on his personal property Fungicide and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) requires nationwide uniformity in pesticide labeling and bars states from diverging from those standards EPA approved labels for the product that did not include a cancer warning “[W]e conclude that the alleged state-law duty to include the Cancer Warning on Roundup’s label imposes requirements that are different from those imposed under FIFRA and that it is therefore preempted by FIFRA,” wrote Chagares Request a FREE trial to receive unlimited access to The court found that the trial judge in the case improperly barred key evidence about the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) from being presented to the jury Other courts have similarly rejected so-called “preemption” arguments by Bayer, which bought Monsanto in 2018. But after failing to get court backing, Bayer has been pushing state and federal lawmakers to give it and other pesticide makers the protection the courts have rejected In a statement issued following the ruling Bayer said it disagreed with the court’s ruling and was considering its legal options “We remain confident that Roundup was not responsible for the alleged injuries in this case based on the overwhelming weight of scientific research and assessments by leading health regulators and scientists worldwide that support the safety of glyphosate-based products,” the company said in the statement Bayer said it has “achieved favorable outcomes in 13 of the last 19 trials and has resolved the overwhelming majority of claims in this litigation The testimony that the trial judge refused to allow was to have come from Charles Benbrook, a former research professor who served at one time as executive director of the National Academy of Sciences board on agriculture. Benbrook has authored papers critical of the EPA’s handling of glyphosate herbicides “There is important new science to share with the jury that clarifies why and how Roundup can cause cancer,” Benbrook said this week after learning of the court ruling Bayer said in its post-ruling statement that it continues to believe Benbrook’s exclusion was was proper Bayer “does not believe he is qualified to testify about scientific issues or the EPA’s regulatory process,” the company said In 2022, a federal court found that the EPA had failed to follow established guidelines for determining cancer risk Bayer has either been ordered by juries – or agreed in settlements – to pay out billions of dollars in damages to many of the plaintiffs But the company has also won several cases at trial, including the Oregon case that is the subject of this week’s ruling Monsanto cites the EPA’s determination that glyphosate is “not likely” to cause cancer in its defense and asserts that the Federal Insecticide Monsanto “relies on the EPA’s approval of the Roundup label and asserts that that approval – which does not include a cancer warning – preempts plaintiff’s claims,” the court states in its ruling the trial judge – at Monsanto’s request – specifically instructed the jury in the case to take EPA oversight into account A new trial is not automatically triggered by the ruling – Monsanto owner Bayer can ask for reconsideration by the appellate court and could seek a review by the Oregon Supreme Court Receive the latest news and environmental insights by subscribing to our newsletter This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License © Environmental Working Group document.write(new Date().getFullYear()) ' + scriptOptions._localizedStrings.webview_notification_text + ' " + scriptOptions._localizedStrings.redirect_overlay_title + " " + scriptOptions._localizedStrings.redirect_overlay_text + " Seattle will receive $160 million from chemical giant Monsanto over pollution in the Lower Duwamish River the city attorney’s office said in a release announced Thursday in a release from Seattle City Attorney Ann Davison marks the largest of its kind that the company has paid to a single city Monsanto produced highly toxic polychlorinated biphenyls While the company understood the chemicals contaminated the environment Former Seattle City Attorney Pete Holmes sued Monsanto in 2016, saying the company contaminated 20,000 acres draining to the Lower Duwamish Not only did Monsanto know the chemicals were toxic but it also hid that understanding and continued to make them a spokesperson for Monsanto said the company did not admit liability or wrongdoing under the settlement and continues to claim it “provided appropriate warnings” to customers about the toxicity of its products but they continued to exist in exterior paint and caulking remaining on buildings They then continued flowing into the Lower Duwamish with stormwater While the $160 million settlement will go toward cleaning the Lower Duwamish, it’s less than half the $342 million cleanup price tag federal officials estimated the work would take in 2014 Davison’s office celebrated the settlement “We all play a role in protecting our environment and I am glad that Monsanto will contribute to this important environmental cleanup,” Davison said in the release The opinions expressed in reader comments are those of the author only and do not reflect the opinions of The Seattle Times Stay secure and make sure you have the best reading experience possible by upgrading your browser Link IconCopy linkFacebook LogoShare on FacebookXShare on XEmailShare via EmailLink copied to clipboardMonsanto wins second Roundup case in Philadelphia as jury finds the weed killer was defective but didn’t cause cancerMonsanto A Philadelphia jury decided Wednesday that Roundup weed killer manufactured by agricultural giant Monsanto was defective but did not cause the cancer of a Pennsylvania man Ryan Young of Erie County sued Monsanto and its German parent company He alleged that he developed non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma after using Roundup multiple times a year starting in 1998 But unlike in those cases, Young’s lawyers did not convince the jury that Roundup was the cause for his cancer, scoring Monsanto its second win in Philadelphia » READ MORE: Philadelphia judge reduces $2.25 billion verdict against Monsanto by more than 80% Judge Angelo Foglietta said it was one of the longest trials he oversaw during his tenure according to a transcript of the proceeding finding that Monsanto was not negligent and that the Roundup product did not cause Young’s disease But the jury also decided that Roundup was defective and that the company showed malice and/or indifference to others A spokesperson for Bayer said that the recent Philadelphia verdict is the “14th favorable outcome in the last 20 trials.” “While we have great sympathy for anyone who suffers a loss or injury the science proves that Roundup™ is not carcinogenic,” the company said in a statement a Dutch chemical company with offices in Radnor that manufacturers an ingredient in Roundup that helps the herbicide effectively kill weeds which did not respond to request for comment was also cleared of negligence by the jury founder of the Texas-based Kirkendall Dwyer law firm that represented Young said in a statement that he was disappointed for his client but that the jury “did send a message to Monsanto that Roundup is defective.” The Roundup legal saga is far from over. A new trial is scheduled to start Monday in Common Pleas Court in a lawsuit brought by Kline & Specter lawyers who have won large verdicts against Monsanto This time they represent an Abington man and his wife who contend his cancer was the result of Roundup use Reporting by Peter Hobson in Canberra and Alasdair Pal in Sydney; Editing by Edwina Gibbs Please enable JS and disable any ad blocker