Paraquat Lawsuit Settlement Amounts

Our lawyers handle Paraquat lawsuits in all 50 states. This page provides the latest news and updates on Paraquat lawsuits in both state and federal courts. We also give our perspective on where this litigation is heading and provide projected settlement payouts for a viable Paraquat lawsuit.

People who have developed Parkinson’s disease from Paraquat want to better understand the range of settlement amounts they can expect in their Paraquat lawsuit.

The expected Paraquat settlement amounts will fluctuate as the litigation progresses. Our lawyers will continue to update this page with revised payout projections.

If you have a potential claim, you want to have that claim prepared before any Paraquat settlement.  Call our law firm today at 800-553-8082 or get a free online consultation.

Paraquat Lawsuit Updates 2025

Stay Extended to… January

October 2, 2025

The MDL judge has extended the stay in the MDL, hoping a settlement agreement is reached.  The stay for case-specific discovery will now run through January 5, 2026, to allow the settlement process to continue.

Latest MDL Case Count

October 1, 2025

There are now 6,445 lawsuits in the MDL.

Stay Ends on Friday

September 24, 2025

The hold on advancing these cases ends on Friday, after which case-specific discovery should proceed unless there is a settlement (or the judge extends it further). The hold on discovery began in May.

New Lawsuit

September 14, 2025

As we wait to see if the MDL will cross the goal line for settlement, there are now 6,362 lawsuits in the MDL.

As we wait for a settlement in the MDL,  new lawsuits keep coming.  In a new lawsuit filed Friday, a Georgia resident has alleged she contracted Parkinson’s from prolonged exposure to Paraquat-based herbicides.

The complaint, filed directly in the MDL, claims that the plaintiff, while performing landscaping work from approximately 2008 to 2017, regularly mixed and sprayed paraquat, resulting in direct skin contact on numerous occasions. The plaintiff asserts that at no point was she aware that exposure to Paraquat when used as instructed could be harmful.

MDL Case Count 

September 10, 2025

A New York Times article today focuses on the growing evidence that Paraquat exposure is fueling America’s Parkinson’s crisis.

The article drew on newly uncovered company records showing that manufacturers knew decades ago the herbicide harmed the nervous system, yet continued to market it aggressively while downplaying risks. Scientists now call Parkinson’s a man-made epidemic, driven in large part by pesticides like Paraquat, and note that regulators in Europe, China, and dozens of other countries have banned the chemical.

The Times piece reinforces what lawsuits have been saying all along: Paraquat is dangerous, and the companies that profited from it should pay for the consequences.

What Is the Latest on the Paraquat MDL Settlement? 

August 12, 2025

Judge Nancy Rosenstengel has extended the stay on all case-specific deadlines in the Paraquat MDL until September 26, 2025, keeping three bellwether cases in limbo. This is the third such pause since April, when the parties announced a settlement in principle to resolve thousands of Parkinson’s disease claims against Syngenta and Chevron.

While much of the agreement’s framework is in place, progress has slowed as some plaintiff firms raise objections or resist certain terms, leaving the deal short of full sign-off.

If the settlement is not finalized by late September, case-specific discovery will restart, with the first bellwether trial still nominally set for October 14, 2025, and a second for April 6, 2026. It probably will not come to this.  The deal should get worked out.

Why Weeding Out Weak Paraquat Lawsuits Benefits You

August 8, 2025

There is a lot of talk in the Paraquat MDL on the cases that are getting dismissed.  Some members of the defense bar, and even a few on the plaintiffs’ side, have pointed to this as a criticism of the filing practices of certain firms.

But the reality is the strength of the underlying Parkinson’s disease claims is not in question. The MDL is operating as intended, identifying and removing cases that do not meet the necessary evidentiary standard.

Judge Rosenstengel has been consistently dismissing or setting aside claims that never should have been filed, allowing the litigation to focus on real cases.  As we have been saying, this is good for plaintiffs who have real and viable claims. For legitimate Paraquat plaintiffs, the narrowing of the MDL is not a setback but an essential step toward a more successful resolution.

Pennsylvania Paraquat Docket Rises to Over 1,100

July 28, 2025

As the MDL seems headed for a wobbly path to a settlement, the Pennsylvania Paraquat litigation has grown to over 1,100 lawsuits.

For Paraquat victims looking to file a claim, one of the most important things to understand is that you do not need to live in Pennsylvania (or have been exposed to Paraquat there), to be part of this growing docket. Pennsylvania law currently allows individuals from outside the state to bring their lawsuits in the Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas, even if their exposure happened elsewhere.

This is not a loophole. It is a legal strategy that many Paraquat lawyers are using to avoid the delays and uncertainty of the federal MDL. The Philadelphia court has experience handling complex mass torts and is moving quickly, with a dedicated judge and an established framework for resolving these cases. That combination of speed, structure, and judicial experience has made it a smart venue for many out-of-state plaintiffs who want their claims to move forward without being lost in a federal backlog.

Effort to Kick Cases Out of Philadelphia 

July 17, 2025

Philadelphia Paraquat lawsuits continue to move forward. A Philadelphia state court judge rejected a push by Syngenta and Chevron to remove cases from the city’s paraquat mass tort docket.

The companies argued that these plaintiffs, who reside outside Pennsylvania, should refile their claims elsewhere. The motion comically questioned the court’s ability to manage such comprehensive litigation. The court shot down the motion.

As we delve deeper into 2025, a palpable sense of anticipation surrounds the Paraquat litigation. After years of legal battles, expert testimonies, and mounting evidence linking this herbicide to Parkinson’s disease, we are now on the cusp of a defining moment. The very first Paraquat trial is scheduled for June in Philadelphia, and the stakes could not be higher.

Chevron and Syngenta, the corporate giants at the heart of this controversy, face an intense and growing wave of pressure. With a jury trial looming, the risks are monumental. Juries tend to favor individuals over corporations in cases like these, particularly when the evidence paints a disturbing picture of corporate negligence and public harm. The unpredictability of a courtroom battle—where a single verdict could set a precedent and spark a flood of additional claims—is a nightmare scenario for these companies.

The billion-dollar question now is whether Chevron and Syngenta will attempt to contain the damage by settling just this one case or will take a broader approach and negotiate a global settlement that resolves the bulk of these lawsuits in one fell swoop. Our firm expectation—and sincere hope—is the latter. These companies have every reason to want to put this litigation behind them, and quickly.

Adding even more urgency to the situation is the shifting political landscape. With Robert F. Kennedy Jr. set to take over HHA, the conversation around toxic chemicals and corporate accountability is set to reach new heights. RFK Jr. has built his career on environmental advocacy, and his presence in the White House ensures that Paraquat, and the broader issue of pesticide safety, will be under an even more intense scrutiny (we hope, anyway). If this case proceeds to trial and results in a massive verdict against Chevron and Syngenta, it could ignite real change in how pesticides are regulated in this country.

Below are frequently asked questions about the Paraquat litigation:

Paraquat Lawsuit

Hundreds of farmworkers and people who worked near oil tanks and railroads have filed lawsuits alleging that occupational exposure to the industrial herbicide paraquat (grameoxone) caused or contributed to the plaintiff’s development of Parkinson’s disease.

There are now nearly 6,000 Paraquat lawsuits in the MDL, and many more are being filed in state court (see the June 13, 2024 update above).  A Parkinson’s disease class action MDL has already been established to accommodate them. In this post, we will look at how much a Paraquat lawsuit might end up being worth by comparing it to settlements in prior mass product cases involving similar claims and in prior tort lawsuits in which the plaintiff developed Parkinson’s.

About the Paraquat Lawsuits

Paraquat is an industrial-strength herbicide that has been around since the 1960s. It is used to control weeds and grasses in agricultural areas. It is also used as a defoliant, removing leaves from trees and plants.  Some farmers will use Paraquat as a desiccant, too, to keep the crops dry and stable.  Chevron started selling Paraquat in the U.S. in 1964.

This chemical is highly toxic.  A teaspoon will kill you. This has led most European countries to ban it outright. In the United States, however, Paraquat is not banned and is widely utilized by large commercial farmers.

Evidence has emerged that prolonged Paraquat exposure can lead to early-onset Parkinson’s disease. Studies have found that agricultural workers who are exposed to Paraquat over long periods have a significantly higher rate of developing Parkinson’s disease. People who live near farms where Paraquat is applied also showed increased rates of Parkinson’s disease.

Paraquat is manufactured by Syngenta, a Swiss agrochemical company. There is evidence indicating that Syngenta was aware of the causal link between paraquat and Parkinson’s for years but deliberately concealed it. Now farm workers exposed to Paraquat and subsequently diagnosed with Parkinson’s are filing product liability lawsuits against Syngenta and its U.S. distributors.

Thousands of Paraquat Parkinson’s lawsuits have been filed, and a Paraquat MDL (Paraquat Prod. Liab. Lit., MDL 3004) was created in the Southern District of Illinois for consolidated handling of the Paraquat claims. New calls to ban Paraquat in the UK over Parkinson’s disease risk

Paraquat Litigation Should Result in a “Global Settlement”

The Paraquat Parkinson’s disease lawsuits are now deep into the multidistrict litigation process, and the likely endgame is becoming clearer. With all federal claims consolidated before a single judge, the MDL has already gone through years of coordinated discovery focused on the scientific evidence linking Paraquat exposure to Parkinson’s disease. New cases continue to be added, ensuring that thousands of claims move forward together.

The next major step is the bellwether trial phase, where a small group of representative lawsuits will be tried to juries. These bellwether verdicts will provide the clearest signal yet of how juries view the evidence against Syngenta and the other defendants. If plaintiffs secure strong verdicts, it will create enormous pressure on the companies to resolve the remaining claims. Our guess has always been that before there is every a single trial, there will be a global settlement in both the MDL and every increasing state court doctket

In mass tort litigation, this is the point where global settlement negotiations typically begin. A global settlement is not a single lump sum but a structured agreement that provides compensation to all eligible victims, with amounts scaled by factors such as severity of injury, age, and strength of the evidence in each case. Given the scientific record that has been built and the scale of exposure, Paraquat litigation appears headed firmly in that direction.

Key Variables for a Paraquat Lawsuit Settlement

The battlefield in the Paraquat Parkinson’s disease lawsuits is over how much the settlement compensation payouts should be.  Syngenta, Chevron, and other co-defendants are fighting to pay the smallest settlement amounts possible.

The individual Paraquat settlement amounts will depend on several things, including:

1. how many Paraquat claims get filed and consolidated into the MDL,
2. how strong the scientific causation evidence is for the plaintiffs between Paraquat exposure and Parkinson’s disease, and
3. the results of the initial bellwether trials.

Estimated Paraquat Lawsuit Settlement Payout Amount

Despite all these variables that will impact the eventual payout value on Paraquat cases, our lawyers can estimate – or at least try to estimate –  reasonable individual Parkinson’s disease settlement payouts. Our lawyers do this by looking at settlement payouts in prior mass torts and an assessment of the likelihood a jury would find the Paraquat defendants responsible.  Our attorneys also look at the settlement compensation for Parkinson’s disease in tort cases generally.

Based on these points of comparison, our Paraquat lawyers think that the likely settlement payout on Paraquat claims will be as follows:

Remember, we are talking about expected Paraquat settlement amounts, not trial value.  The average successful verdict in an individual Paraquat lawsuit would likely be more than $10 million, with the possibility of much more in punitive damages.   Does that sound too high?

Remember, the average successful verdict in the Roundup lawsuits was well over $500 million.  In the 3M earplug lawsuit, where the claim involves a hearing-related injury, the average individual jury payout exceeds $10 million.   Parkinson’s disease is a far more serious injury.  So an average jury compensation payout estimated at $10 million might be on the low side.

What do we expect the average Paraquat settlement will be?  We think the average settlement will be in the $600,000 to $900,000 range.  Where our attorneys think it will fall within that range depends in large measure on what the floor cutoff is in terms of viability.  The defendants may want a settlement that covers all plaintiffs, or they may only want to settle the strongest cases.  Our best guess is that it will be the latter, which will decrease the average payout.

Looking back at this in 2025…we think victims will see more significant Paraquat settlements than we predict here although the average in the MDL will be brought down by a lot of “iffy” cases.  There should be many cases that break the million-dollar settlement barrier.

So these projections are more for state court cases than the MDL. The worst-kept Paraquat settlement secret is that the cases in state court, especially Pennsylvania, will have higher average per person settlement amounts than Paraquat lawsuits filed in the MDL.

Settlement Amounts in Lawsuits Involving Parkinson’s Disease

Our other comparative point for valuing the paraquat cases is the settlement value of other tort cases in which Parkinson’s disease was the plaintiff’s primary injury.

Parkinson’s is difficult to value because it is not a common injury in personal injury claims.  Camp Lejeune Parkinson’s disease lawsuits are now also being filed But there are only two settlement amounts (average settlement: $$325,000) so far in that litigation.

So, the next question is, is there a stand-in injury for Parkinson’s disease, because it is an uncommon injury in tort cases that we can use as a settlement marker?  Tardive dyskinesia is similar enough that settlement amounts in those lawsuits might give us a lens to Parkinson’s disease settlement amounts.  Our lawyers have had some experience in those cases.  So let’s look at settlement amounts and jury payouts for tardive dyskinesia because it is a similar injury to Parkinson’s disease.

• Watters v Qin (Arizona 2024) $335,669 Verdict: The defendant allegedly was stalking the plaintiff (a justice of the peace). The defendant slashed the plaintiff’s tires, drove by her house and shouted threats 2 or 3 times per day, trespassed on her property, and engaged in other types of harassment. The plaintiff alleged that the stress of this harassment exacerbated her pre-existing Parkinson’s disease. This gives us an idea of how a jury values “Parkinson’s symptoms aggravation.”
• Axe v Spring Meadows (Pennsylvania 2018) $215,000 Settlement: The plaintiff was 73 years old and alleged that he developed tardive dyskinesia from medications given to him by a nursing home. Why was the settlement payout so low? I don’t know.
• Plaintiff v Defendant (New York 2017) $1,400,000 Settlement: Plaintiff (mid-30s) develops tardive dyskinesia from antipsychotic medication used to treat her bipolar disorder and sues the doctor who prescribed it.
• Soref v Agresti (Florida 2017) $569,000 Verdict: A female in her mid-20s with a history of drug abuse claims bipolar drugs cause her to develop tardive dyskinesia.
• Tamaraz v Lincoln Electric (Ohio 2007) $20,500,000 Verdict: This is a rare jury payout involving a Parkinson’s disease case. The plaintiff filed a welding rod product liability lawsuit alleging he developed Parkinson’s disease from exposure to manganese in welding rods. A jury awarded $17.5 million to him and another $3 million to his wife.  This verdict highlights the substantial potential compensation payouts a jury may award in a Parkinson’s disease case. This is the outcome the defendant really fears.

These cases (particularly the welding rod case) are suggestive of the type of verdict we might expect to see in Paraquat bellwether trials. These compensation awards support the settlement payout valuation estimates above.

Paraquat Lawsuits Can be Filed Decades After the Plaintiff’s Exposure

If you were recently diagnosed with Parkinson’s disease that may be related to Paraquat,  you can still file a Paraquat lawsuit today, even if your exposure to Paraquat occurred years or even decades ago. All states have a statute of limitations that imposes a deadline for filing a civil tort action for things such as product liability. The applicable statute of limitations period for a tort claim ranges from 1 to 7 years, depending on the state.

The applicable SOL period does not begin to run, however, until the plaintiff either knew or had reason to know that they had a claim. For a paraquat lawsuit, this means that the SOL period would not begin to run until the plaintiff knew or “should have known” that they had Parkinson’s disease and that it might have been caused by exposure to paraquat.

The connection between paraquat exposure and Parkinson’s disease is something that a reasonable person would not be expected to know. This is particularly true because the companies that made and sold paraquat deliberately failed to warn about the link between paraquat and Parkinson’s. Most of the plaintiffs in the Paraquat and Parkinson’s disease litigation are bringing their claims based on exposure that occurred a very long time ago.

Link Between Paraquat and Parkinson’s Disease

Parkinson’s disease is a progressive neurodegenerative disorder of the brain that affects primarily the motor system, the part of the central nervous system that controls movement.

The characteristic symptoms of Parkinson’s disease are its “primary” motor symptoms: resting tremor; bradykinesia (slowness in voluntary movement and reflexes); rigidity; and postural instability. There is currently no cure for Parkinson’s disease. Existing treatments do not slow or stop their progression; such treatments are capable only of temporarily and partially relieving the motor symptoms. These treatments also have unwelcome side effects the longer they are used.

Paraquat is a toxic chemical that is a highly effective plant killer. Unfortunately, the same properties that make paraquat toxic to plant cells also make it highly damaging to human nerve cells and create a substantial risk to anyone who uses it.

Oxidative stress is a major factor in—if not the precipitating cause of—the degeneration and death of dopaminergic neurons, which is the primary pathophysiological cause of Parkinson’s disease. Paraquat is designed to injure and kill plants by creating oxidative stress, which causes or contributes to the degeneration and death of plant cells. Similarly, Paraquat injures and kills animals by creating oxidative stress, which causes the degeneration and death of animal cells.

The causal link between Paraquat and Parkinson’s disease is well established.  Hundreds of animal studies involving various routes of exposure have found that paraquat creates oxidative stress that results in pathophysiology consistent with that seen in human Parkinson’s disease.

Many epidemiological studies have also found an association between Paraquat exposure and Parkinson’s disease, including multiple studies finding a two-to-five-fold or greater increase in the risk of Parkinson’s disease in populations with occupational exposure to paraquat compared to populations without such exposure.

You do not have to work on a farm to have a viable Paraquat lawsuit. Researchers in an article in the American Journal of Epidemiology found that exposure to Paraquat or Maneb within 1600 feet of your home causes a 75% increase in the risk of getting Parkinson’s disease.

Here are the key articles on Paraquat exposure and Parkinson’s disease with a summary of the findings:

• Berry, C., La Vecchia, C., & Nicotera, P. (2010). Paraquat and Parkinson’s disease. Cell Death & Differentiation, 17(7), 1115-1125. This study looked at the’ role of pesticides in causing Parkinson’s disease. The researchers report that acute chemical exposure was “sufficient” to cause Parkinson’s.
• Costello, S., et al. (2009). Parkinson’s disease and residential exposure to maneb and paraquat from agricultural applications in the central valley of California. American journal of epidemiology, 169(8), 919-926.  This study examined whether living near pesticide-using farms was associated with Parkinson’s. The researchers found that living within 500 feet of farms that used paraquat and maneb increased one’s Parkinson’s risk by 75 percent. They also found that people younger than 60 were at significantly higher risk. The researchers concluded that their findings show that exposure to paraquat and maneb, whether alone or combined, significantly increased the Parkinson’s.
• Di Monte, D.A. (2003). The environment and Parkinson’s disease: Is the nigrostriatal system preferentially targeted by neurotoxins? The Lancet Neurology, 2(9), 531-538. This report concluded that a multidisciplinary approach to Parkinson’s etiology would help determine whether environmental exposure may cause the disease.
• Firestone, J. A., et al. (2005). Pesticides and Risk of Parkinson’s Disease: A Population-Based Case-Control Study. Archives of Neurology, 62(1), 91-95.  This study looked at whether pesticides were associated with Parkinson’s. The researchers interviewed 250 Parkinson’s patients and 388 non-Parkinson’s patients. They assessed their self-reported pesticide exposures. The researchers also categorized the patients by occupation. They found that pesticide workers were more likely to develop Parkinson’s compared to crop, animal, and dairy farmers. The researchers concluded their findings were consistent with other studies that found an association between pesticides and Parkinson’s.
• Mandel, J. S., Adami, H. O., & Cole, P. (2012). Paraquat and Parkinson’s disease: an overview of the epidemiology and a review of two recent studies. Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology, 62(2), 385-392. The report evaluated two studies that evaluated the association of pesticide exposure with Parkinson’s. The researchers found that the studies created inadequate designs that examined very few exposed patients. They also reported that their results were inconsistent. The researchers concluded that these two studies fail to prove an association between pesticides and Parkinson’s. They also concluded that more rigorous studies were needed for confirmation.
• McCormack, A. L., et al. (2002). Environmental risk factors and Parkinson’s disease: selective degeneration of nigral dopaminergic neurons caused by the herbicide paraquat. Neurobiology of Disease, 10(2), 119-127.  This study looked at whether Paraquat exposure caused Parkinson’s disease symptoms in mice. The researchers injected mice with the herbicide. They found that this caused dopaminergic neuron death, a Parkinson’s disease symptom. The researchers concluded that the findings show that Paraquat neurotoxicity caused a prominent physiological response to Parkinson’s.
• Stephenson, J. (2000). Exposure to home pesticides linked to Parkinson’s disease. JAMA, 283(23), 3055-3056. This article reported on the association between home or garden exposures to pesticides and Parkinson’s.
• Stykel, M.G., et al. (2018). Nitration of microtubules blocks axonal mitochondrial transport in a human pluripotent stem cell model of Parkinson’s disease. The FASEB Journal, 32(10), 5350-5364. This study looked at mechanisms showing that pesticide exposure disrupted cells in a manner that mimicked Parkinson’s-associated mutations. The researchers concluded that their results were the first to demonstrate a gene that triggered mitochondrial transport deficits during pesticide exposure.  Here is the money quote from one of the authors: “People exposed to these chemicals are at about a 250-percent higher risk of developing Parkinson’s disease than the rest of the population.”  So most people who have Parkinson’s disease from Paraquat would not have had Parkinson’s disease without Paraquat exposure.
• Tanner, C. M., et al. (2011). Rotenone, Paraquat, and Parkinson’s disease. Environmental health perspectives, 119(6), 866-872. This study examined whether pesticides that caused oxidative stress or mitochondrial dysfunction were associated with Parkinson’s in humans. The researchers found that paraquat and rotenone were associated with Parkinson’s.
• Uversky, V.N., et al. (2002). Synergistic effects of pesticides and metals on the fibrillation of α-synuclein: implications for Parkinson’s disease. Neurotoxicology, 23(4-5), 527-536. This study looked at a novel model that determined environmental factors and genetic susceptibility that formed the underlying molecular basis of idiopathic Parkinson’s. The researchers found that some pesticides and metals caused conformational alpha-synuclein changes and accelerated the alpha-synuclein fibrils rate.
• Vaccari, C., et al. (2019). Paraquat and Parkinson’s disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies. Journal of Toxicology and Environmental Health, Part B, 22(5-6), 172-202. This systematic review looked at literature and meta-analysis involving paraquat’s exposure to Parkinson’s. The researchers found that the current data suggest a positive association between Paraquat exposure and Parkinson’s. However, they concluded that the evidence was insufficient to indicate a causal association. The researchers reported that better-designed studies were needed.

Getting a Paraquat Lawyer

If you have a potential Paraquat Parkinson’s disease lawsuit, let’s talk about your claim and your options.  Call our toxic exposure lawyers at 800-553-8082 or get a free online consultation.