Facing a Roundup lawsuit? Get expert guidance from the Best Lawyer for Roundup Lawsuit to maximize your chances of a successful outcome in your Roundup case.
Senior Associate, Livingston & Charles LLP
In recent years, a product many believed was a simple solution for pesky weeds has become the subject of heated debate and litigation.
Roundup, a widely-used weed killer, is now being linked to serious health complications, leading to a surge in legal action.
Victims claim that heavy exposure to Roundup, and specifically its active ingredient, glyphosate, caused them to develop cancer, particularly non-Hodgkin's lymphoma.
Monsanto, the maker of Roundup, is now facing increasing Roundup lawsuits from those who believe their health was significantly compromised due to exposure to the product.
If you or a loved one are among those affected, it's crucial to understand that you have rights. You may be entitled to significant compensation for your suffering.
This comprehensive guide aims to shed light on the Roundup lawsuit, bringing you a step closer to the justice you deserve.
Through the help of ConsumerShield, victims and their families can navigate the complex legal landscape, ensuring that their voice is heard and their claim is effectively pursued.
The Roundup litigation has been a significant topic in the news due to the substantial payouts and settlements associated with these cases. Some of the most recent and notable developments are:
In a remarkable verdict on Friday, a Missouri state court in Jefferson City ordered a massive $1.561 billion award in a Roundup case. Plaintiffs James Draeger, Valorie Gunther, and Dan Anderson were awarded a total of $61.1 million in actual damages, along with a staggering $500 million each in punitive damages. The jury sided with the plaintiffs, who claimed that prolonged use of Roundup in their lawns and gardens led to the development of their non-Hodgkin’s lymphomas.
The Roundup litigation has seen varied outcomes in recent years. In 2023, significant plaintiff victories were recorded in California ($332 million in the Dennis case) and Pennsylvania ($175 million in the Caranci case), alongside a $1.25 million verdict in Missouri (Durnell). However, defense verdicts prevailed in several other cases, including three in Missouri in 2023 and four in 2022.
Notably, earlier years witnessed large plaintiff awards, such as $80.2 million in the 2019 Hardeman MDL case, and a massive $2.055 billion in the 2019 Pilliod case in California. The trend of substantial plaintiff victories began with the 2018 Johnson case in California, resulting in a $289.2 million award. Despite these large awards for plaintiffs, the number of defense verdicts highlights the unpredictability and varied outcomes in Roundup trials.
Following Bayer AG's third-quarter financial report, a key message emerged from their call with journalists: the company is not prepared to make substantial settlement offers at this juncture. CFO Wolfgang Nickl conveyed to the media, "We're not looking to issue large settlements, especially at a time of limited free cash flow."
Adding to this stance, CEO Bill Anderson voiced his dissatisfaction with Bayer's 2023 financial performance, pointing out a critical "zero cash flow" situation. This financial predicament, coupled with a reluctance to offer reasonable compensation to victims, signals a concerning phase for Bayer. The company's current approach could potentially lead to more profound corporate challenges if not addressed with urgency and responsibility.
Monsanto is actively contesting the hefty $175 million verdict delivered in Philadelphia. The company argues that the court improperly influenced the jury's decision-making in a deadlock situation during a case that accused Monsanto of failing to warn consumers about the carcinogenic risks of its Roundup product. Monsanto's contention revolves around the court allegedly exerting pressure on the jury to reach a unanimous decision without informing the involved parties.
However, labeling this as coercion might be an overreach. Judges typically have considerable discretion in guiding juries towards continued deliberations in instances of deadlock. Monsanto’s challenge to the verdict hinges on this nuanced aspect of judicial conduct and jury management.
In a landmark case, a farmworker's discrimination lawsuit against Monsanto has culminated in a settlement. The lawsuit accused Monsanto of unjustly delaying a personal injury settlement, alleging discrimination based on the worker's non-U.S. citizenship status. This action was claimed to breach section 1981 of the Civil Rights Act of 1866, which safeguards against discrimination in contract matters.
Under the terms of the settlement, Monsanto has committed to a significant policy change: the company will no longer consider an individual's immigration status or citizenship when finalizing any future Roundup settlement agreements. This pledge marks a step towards equitable treatment in Monsanto's contractual practices.
In a significant legal triumph, Bayer has received a favorable ruling from the Ninth Circuit, which declared the California mandate for warning labels on glyphosate products unconstitutional. This mandate was found to infringe upon the First Amendment by compelling agricultural producers to assert a viewpoint not unanimously supported by the scientific community concerning the safety of glyphosate.
The court's decision underscores the controversy within the scientific world about the potential risks of glyphosate, emphasizing that producers should not be coerced into adopting a stance not universally acknowledged by scientific experts.
Amidst the court's unified stance, one judge voiced opposition. As the industry awaits the Supreme Court's perspective, speculation arises that Monsanto might preemptively label their products with warnings prior to any Supreme Court involvement.
According to a Law.com report, legal representatives for plaintiffs in the Roundup non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) cancer cases are intensifying calls for Monsanto to resolve about 40,000 pending lawsuits across the United States. The legal teams insist that there is a strong scientific agreement on the harmful effects of the herbicide, advocating for Monsanto to halt sales and proceed with compensating affected individuals.
With the European Union's recent decision against reauthorizing glyphosate and U.S. regulatory agencies reevaluating its carcinogenic risks, Monsanto's parent company, Bayer, might be more inclined to consider settlements. Additionally, the recent financial blow with $500 million in verdicts within a single week could significantly influence Bayer's approach to resolving these claims.
Yesterday, anticipation reached a peak as the jury in the Dennis case in San Diego went into deliberation. The legal community and plaintiffs closely followed the developments, hoping for a third consecutive win in this pivotal litigation series.
In a groundbreaking decision today, the jury in the Dennis case concluded their deliberations, awarding a monumental sum of $332 million. The breakdown of this sum reveals a profound statement by the jury: $325 million in punitive damages and $7 million in compensatory damages. This verdict not only marks a historic moment in the Dennis litigation but significantly reshapes the entire landscape of these cases. With this latest judgment, expectations for settlement amounts in related litigations are now scaling new heights, heralding a potentially transformative phase in these ongoing legal battles.
Philadelphia jury delivered a substantial verdict in the Caranci case, awarding $175 million. This amount breaks down to $25 million for compensation and a staggering $150 million in punitive damages. More details will follow as we gather more information.
This verdict marks a pivotal moment. As we've previously emphasized, this trial had the potential to be transformative – and it has indeed proven to be. The case revolved around an 82-year-old man diagnosed with NHL almost two decades ago, without any particularly unique circumstances.
In the ongoing Dennis trial taking place in San Diego, a pivotal contention raised by the plaintiffs' attorneys revolves around the EPA's 2022 decision to backtrack on its initial assertion that glyphosate, an ingredient in the Roundup herbicide, does not pose cancer risks to humans.
This change in stance stems from a June 2022 verdict by the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals. The court determined that the EPA failed to adequately assess the potential carcinogenic risks of glyphosate. Consequently, the FDA rescinded its initial position and committed to a more in-depth evaluation of glyphosate's safety. This development significantly challenges Monsanto's longstanding defense strategy of leaning on the EPA's endorsement. While Monsanto is anticipated to continue emphasizing the EPA's earlier support, the focus of the plaintiffs' attorneys on this shift in regulatory stance will undoubtedly intensify the debate in the San Diego courtroom.
A St. Louis jury recently mandated a $1.25 million award to a 67-year-old plaintiff, concluding that Monsanto failed to adequately disclose the potential hazards of its Roundup product, which the plaintiff blamed for his non-Hodgkin lymphoma. This trial, diverging from predecessors that narrowly scrutinized glyphosate's carcinogenicity, employed a refreshed legal approach. Plaintiff's attorneys argued that cancer links extend beyond glyphosate to multiple Roundup components. This groundbreaking verdict disrupts Monsanto's prior streak of nine straight defense wins in Roundup trials and reinvigorates the momentum for plaintiffs. Despite a series of past defeats, the optimism surrounding these cases persisted, now further buoyed by this outcome, potentially compelling Bayer to consider fairer compensation in upcoming settlements.
Despite a series of recent defense verdicts for Monsanto (now Bayer) in various state courts, including a triumph in St. Louis merely a fortnight ago, the tide might be turning as a new Roundup trial commences in Philadelphia's Court of Common Pleas. Plaintiffs are hopeful for a reversal in their fortunes in what will be the inaugural Roundup litigation in Philadelphia, noted for being among the nation's most plaintiff-friendly venues. The jury selection kicked off last week in the landmark case, Caranci v. Monsanto, et al., setting the stage for a potentially pivotal battle in Roundup-related proceedings.
The role of glyphosate in causing cancer is under judicial scrutiny in Australia's ongoing case against Monsanto, a legal frontier that, while distinct from the U.S. system, might indirectly influence Roundup litigations stateside. This class action encompasses claims from over 800 Australians, asserting that exposure to Roundup, a glyphosate-infused herbicide, from July 1976 to July 2022, culminated in their diagnoses of non-Hodgkin's lymphoma.
Presiding in Melbourne's federal court, Justice Michael Lee oversees this bench trial, reflecting the structure of analogous international legal contests. The case's initial focus dwells on the general causation—specifically, whether glyphosate is a catalyst for non-Hodgkin's lymphoma. This segment of the trial is slated for completion by October 31. Meanwhile, Monsanto maintains the safety of its glyphosate-based products, citing comprehensive testing and adherence to usage guidelines, while suggesting alternative causes behind the plaintiffs' health conditions.
a jury in San Francisco awarded a total of $550 million in punitive damages to a couple who claimed that their prolonged exposure to Roundup resulted in them both developing non-Hodgkin's lymphoma.
Bayer announced a $2 billion plan to resolve future Roundup lawsuits. This resolution plan aims to address the potential future claims from Roundup users who may develop non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma.
These recent news stories highlight the ongoing nature of the Roundup lawsuit and its substantial impact on Monsanto and its parent company, Bayer AG. The high payouts and settlements underline the serious health risks associated with Roundup and the corporate negligence in failing to adequately warn users about these risks.
At Consumer Shield, we keep abreast of all the latest developments in the Roundup lawsuits to ensure we provide the most up-to-date and comprehensive advice to our clients. If you or a loved one has been affected by Roundup, don't hesitate to reach out to us. We can help you understand your rights and guide you through the legal process.
Stay up to date
Get updates on all of our lawsuits, news, articles, research and lawsuit updates.
A Roundup lawsuit refers to legal action taken against Monsanto, the manufacturer of the herbicide Roundup. The main contention in these lawsuits is the alleged link between glyphosate, the active ingredient in Roundup, and certain forms of cancer.
Monsanto introduced Roundup in the 1970s, and it quickly became a staple for both residential and commercial use due to its effectiveness in killing weeds. However, the product's safety came under intense scrutiny when, in 2015, the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) classified glyphosate as "probably carcinogenic to humans".
Despite Monsanto's insistence on the safety of their product, research and case studies suggest a strong link between exposure to Roundup and the development of non-Hodgkin's lymphoma, a type of cancer that originates in the lymphatic system.
The Roundup lawsuits aim to hold Monsanto accountable for the alleged harm caused by their product. Victims argue that they were not adequately warned about the potential health risks associated with the use of Roundup.
As a result of these claims, thousands of lawsuits have been filed against Monsanto, now owned by Bayer AG, by individuals who developed cancer after exposure to Roundup. The proceedings in these lawsuits have revealed alarming information about the potential dangers of glyphosate and raised serious questions about Monsanto's practices.
At ConsumerShield, we understand the depth of the crisis and are committed to helping victims seek the justice they deserve. We stand ready to provide the guidance and support needed to navigate the complexities of a Roundup lawsuit.
Anyone who has developed non-Hodgkin's lymphoma or other types of cancer believed to be caused by exposure to Roundup is eligible to file a Roundup lawsuit. This includes individuals who have used Roundup in their professional or personal capacity.
People who are most likely to have been exposed to Roundup, and hence at risk, include:
Moreover, the family members of victims, particularly those who have lost a loved one due to diseases associated with Roundup exposure, can file a lawsuit on behalf of the deceased. Estate managers can also represent the victim in court.
It's important to note that eligibility to file a lawsuit is not limited to these groups. If you believe that your health has been adversely affected due to exposure to Roundup, you could be entitled to file a lawsuit.
Understanding who is eligible to file a Roundup lawsuit can be complex and requires expert knowledge of the law. That's where ConsumerShield steps in.
We specialize in such cases and can help determine your eligibility, guide you through the legal process, and ensure you have the best chance possible at securing the compensation you deserve.
The main health concern associated with Roundup revolves around its active ingredient, glyphosate. Research has shown that exposure to glyphosate could lead to a variety of health issues, the most severe of which is the development of certain types of cancer, specifically non-Hodgkin's lymphoma.
Non-Hodgkin's lymphoma is a form of cancer that affects the lymphatic system, a part of the body's immune system. Symptoms can include swollen lymph nodes, chest pain, abdominal pain, fatigue, and fever. Numerous studies, including those cited by the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), have found a significant correlation between exposure to glyphosate and an increased risk of developing this type of cancer.
But the potential health effects of Roundup might not be limited to non-Hodgkin's lymphoma. Some studies suggest a link between glyphosate and other forms of cancer, including skin, lung, and colorectal cancer. Other reported health risks include kidney and liver damage, endocrine disruption, and potential harm to the microbiota in the human gut.
Despite these potential risks, glyphosate continues to be the most widely used herbicide in the U.S., and Roundup products are still readily available for purchase. Many individuals may still be unaware of the potential risks associated with their use of Roundup.
This is where the ConsumerShield team can step in. We are dedicated to helping individuals who have suffered as a result of exposure to Roundup navigate the legal process, understand their rights, and potentially secure the compensation they deserve. Our team of experts can provide the guidance necessary to file a Roundup lawsuit and seek justice.
Roundup lawsuits have resulted in significant payouts for victims, reflecting the severe harm caused by the product. These compensations serve as a tangible acknowledgment of the suffering experienced by victims and a strong deterrent against such corporate negligence in the future.
These examples demonstrate the potential for substantial compensation for those who have been affected by Roundup.
We are working with thousands of amazing partners.
Taking the first step towards filing a Roundup lawsuit can feel daunting, but with the right support, the process can be straightforward. Here's a step-by-step guide on how to get started:
Roundup lawsuits primarily hinge on the claim that glyphosate, the active ingredient in Roundup, is a potent carcinogen capable of causing cancer, particularly non-Hodgkin's lymphoma. Plaintiffs argue that Monsanto, the producer of Roundup, failed to sufficiently warn users about this inherent risk, thereby neglecting their duty of care. The lawsuits seek to hold Monsanto accountable for the harm caused by its product.
The amount of compensation you can expect from a Roundup lawsuit varies considerably, as it depends on the specifics of your case, including the degree of harm suffered and the level of negligence involved. In the past, Roundup lawsuits have seen verdicts ranging from tens of millions to billions of dollars, highlighting the severity of the harm caused by Roundup and the substantial financial implications for Monsanto.
Not necessarily. While there are class-action lawsuits against Monsanto, many cases are individual personal injury lawsuits. The best course of action largely depends on the specifics of your case. ConsumerShield can help determine the right path for you by examining your individual circumstances and advising on the best legal strategy.
The timeframe for filing a Roundup lawsuit, also known as the statute of limitations, varies by state. Given this variability, it's critical to consult with a legal expert to ensure you don't miss your window for filing a lawsuit. At ConsumerShield, we can provide guidance on these time-sensitive matters.
Typically, to file a lawsuit, one must have suffered some harm. Therefore, if you've used Roundup but haven't been diagnosed with a condition linked to it, such as non-Hodgkin's lymphoma or another form of cancer, you may not be able to file a lawsuit. However, it's important to consult with a legal expert to understand your rights and options.
The duration of a Roundup lawsuit can vary greatly depending on a host of factors, including the specifics of your case and the court's schedule. Legal proceedings can often take several months to years to reach a resolution. Despite the potentially lengthy process, pursuing justice can be a crucial step towards achieving closure and securing compensation.
Not always. Many lawsuits are settled out of court before they reach a trial, which means you might not need to appear in court. However, you should be prepared for the possibility of a court appearance and discuss this with your attorney.
Yes, you can. If your loved one used Roundup and subsequently passed away from non-Hodgkin's lymphoma or another form of cancer linked to Roundup, you may be able to file a wrongful death lawsuit. This legal route can offer a means to seek justice for your loved one and secure financial compensation.
Proving that your illness was caused by Roundup can be complex. It often requires expert testimonies, medical records, and evidence of your exposure to Roundup. An experienced attorney, like those at ConsumerShield, can help gather this evidence and construct a compelling case on your behalf.
At ConsumerShield, we are committed to helping you navigate through these complex legal matters. We understand the intricacies of the Roundup litigation and can help you understand your rights, potentially enabling you to receive the compensation you deserve.
At ConsumerShield, we understand the physical, emotional, and financial toll that exposure to Roundup can take on you and your family. Our mission is to guide you through the legal process, ensuring you have the best possible chance of receiving the compensation you deserve.
But our commitment to you goes beyond guiding you through lawsuits. We believe in empowering you with knowledge about the products you buy, the services you use, and the medications and medical devices you rely on. We strive to hold negligent companies accountable for their actions.
If you or a loved one has been affected by exposure to Roundup, don't hesitate to reach out to us. With our expertise in Roundup lawsuits, we can help you navigate the complexities of the legal system and fight for your rights.
Stay up to date
Get updates on all of our lawsuits, news, articles, research and lawsuit updates.
Experience a streamlined and timely legal process that ensures your lawsuit stays on track and progresses efficiently.
Our relentless advocacy is focused on securing the highest possible compensation for individuals impacted.
Count on our unwavering commitment to prioritize what's best for people affected, ensuring their rights and interests are safeguarded.