Lawsuit Information Center
In this post, our Roundup lawyers will give you:
- an update on where things stand in the Roundup class action lawsuit in September 2024
- the likely direction the Roundup litigation will take moving forward and
- the expected future settlement amounts in the Bayer Roundup lawsuit (Phase 2)
67,000 Roundup Cases Left… and Counting
As of March 2025, Monsanto has reached settlement agreements in nearly 100,000 Roundup lawsuits. Monsanto paid approximately $11 billion. 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. You can reach us at 800-553-8082.
May 2, 2025 – MDL Case Count Update
Roundup filings are holding steady, 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.
April 29, 2025 – North Dakota Picks Lobbyist Over Their Constituents
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. Under this statute, if the product label complies with federal guidelines, it becomes a shield against legal accountability.
It is a clear win for Bayer, which has spent years and millions of dollars trying to avoid courtroom losses tied to Roundup and its link to non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma. In this case, they found a receptive audience in a small, agriculture-heavy state, and the North Dakota Legislature chose to back big industry over the rights of their own constituents.
Similar bills are pending in Georgia, Missouri, and several other states. The outcome in North Dakota gives Bayer a headline. What it does not give them is broad legal immunity, at least not yet.
April 11, 2025 – MDL Uptick
We are seeing more Roundup NHL lawsuits filed in the MDL in April. In one new lawsuit filed yesterday, a man from Ocean Springs, Mississippi, alleges that decades of using glyphosate-based herbicides caused his cancer. The plaintiff, 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.
April 8, 2025 – What’s Next?
Trials are set to resume in May, starting in St. Louis. Another multi-plaintiff case is scheduled for June in Chicago.
April 6, 2025 – Supreme Court Appeal
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. Not much has changed since. 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.
April 1, 2025 – Roundup MDL Update
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.
March 23, 2025 – Jury Hammers Bayer with $2.1 Billion Roundup Verdict in Georgia
On Friday, 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, as it has done in other cases, 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, which is drowning in Roundup litigation. Despite paying $10 billion to settle past claims, the company still faces over 60,000 active lawsuits, many of which are in state courts, where juries have consistently delivered massive verdicts in favor of plaintiffs. Meanwhile, 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, it will dig a deeper and deeper hole.
Get More Roundup Lawsuit Updates and News 👈
March 19, 2025 – Push for Roundup Consolidation in New Jersey
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, streamline discovery, and prevent inconsistent rulings.
Currently, 41 cases are pending in New Jersey, with plaintiffs asserting that Roundup exposure led to serious health conditions, including non-Hodgkin lymphoma. 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. Monsanto has opposed the renewed bid, maintaining that the number of claims does not justify multicounty litigation.
March 11, 2025 – Bayer “Threatens” to Take Roundup Off the Market
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. Meanwhile, 67,000 more lawsuits remain unresolved, 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, petitioning the U.S. Supreme Court again, and seeking legislative protection. It has not yet made good on its veiled threat to pull Roundup from the U.S. market, but if it ever does, it will only be because litigation has made it too costly to continue profiting from a dangerous product.
March 10, 2025 – Selling Stock to Pay Roundup Settlements
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. It is not as if this was big news, Bayer would have to find the money somewhere to fund settlements.
January 30, 2025 – New Study on Birth Weight and Roundup
January 29, 2025 – RFK, Jr.
January 28, 2025 – Roundup Settlement Rumors
January 4, 2025 – Caranci Appeal
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.
The appeal also challenges Judge James C. Crumlish III’s evidentiary rulings, including the exclusion of evidence showing global scientific consensus on the safety of glyphosate, the active ingredient in Roundup. Monsanto argues that this exclusion, coupled with the inclusion of a foreign report favoring the plaintiff, created a double standard and undermined the fairness of the trial. Additionally, Monsanto cites it new favorite case, the Third Circuit’s Schaffner v. Monsanto ruling, which preempts state law failure-to-warn claims, as grounds for appeal.
The foundation of Monsanto’s appeal appears unsteady and unconvincing.
December 8, 2024 – Mistrial in Chicago
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. Monsanto’s lawyers know better. Any law student who has taken an evidence class understands that such questioning is not admissible.
November 20, 2024 – RFK Jr. and Roundup
Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has long been a vocal critic of Roundup. In 2018, 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. A jury awarded Johnson $289 million, finding that Monsanto acted with “malice and oppression” by failing to warn consumers about the potential health risks of its product.
After the verdict, Kennedy remarked, “This jury found Monsanto acted with malice and oppression because they knew what they were doing was wrong and did it with reckless disregard for human life.” He called the decision a strong message to Monsanto’s boardroom. You like him or hate him. But Kennedy is clearly on the right side of this issue. (Here is a Facebook post from him. )
If Kennedy is confirmed as Secretary of Health and Human Services, his leadership could meaningfully influence the Roundup litigation. True to his history, 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.
October 24, 2024 – Massachusetts State Court Follows 3rd Circuit
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, Roundup. Plaintiff’s design defects remain, but it is certainly a blow to lose the failure to warn claim.
The ruling mirrors the 3rd Circuit’s opinion in Schaffner v. Monsanto. The concern is that this case provides judges who are inclined to favor corporate protection, such as those who support Monsanto, with a legal basis to do so, and we will likely see more opinions like this.
October 10, 2024 – New $78 Million Verdict in Philadelphia
The jury in Melissen awarded $3 million in compensatory damages and $75 million in punitive damages. Plaintiffs needed a big win, and we got one.
September 16, 2024 – New Trial Starts Today
Philadelphia’s sixth Roundup trial, Melissen v. Monsanto, is set to start today. A jury was selected last week. Hopes are high for this case.
September 11, 2024 – Loss in Philadelphia
In Young v. Monsanto, 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. Some cases are stronger than others. But to put this in context, in the five Roundup cases tried in Philadelphia, plaintiffs have won three. 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. Including those two losses, the average of these verdicts is approximately $194.17 million.
September 4, 2024 – Missouri Loss Affirmed
A Missouri appeals panel upheld a trial court victory for Monsanto Co. in a Moore v. Monsanto. 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. Additionally, 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. Moreover, 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.
This has been a few good weeks for Bayer. 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? History suggests the latter.
September 3, 2024 – MDL Experts Motions
In the MDL, Monsanto has filed a motion to exclude the testimony of seven plaintiffs’ experts: Dr. Peter T. Silberstein, Dr. Bruce Woda, Dr. Lawrence M. Weiss, Dr. Craig Nichols, Dr. Richard Bakst, Dr. William Fleming, and Connie Welch-DuJardin. Plaintiffs’ filed their responses to these motions on Friday.
August 16, 2024: Big Appellate Win for Bayer
Bayer won a big victory in the 3rd Circuit yesterday. The court ruled that federal pesticide labeling regulations preempt state laws. This decision, stemming from a case in Pennsylvania, 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.
Chief Judge Michael A. 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. Supreme Court will become a reality. But we do now have a split among federal appellate courts over the issue of federal preemption of state warning requirements on pesticides. So, it is more realistic today than it was before this opinion.
Bayer stock is up 10% this morning on the news.
July 23, 2024: Important Appellate Win in Oregon
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, Dr. Charles Benbrook, regarding EPA regulations.
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 active ingredient in Roundup.
The Oregon intermediate appellate court agreed was a mistake not to allow Dr. Benbrook to testify. As a result, the appellate court reversed the judgment and remanded the case. This means the plaintiff gets a new trial.
Monsanto cross-appealed, arguing that the plaintiff’s claims were preempted by the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA), looking for some court, somewhere, to buy into their argument. The court, however, rejected Monsanto’s argument, concluding, as every court has, 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.
July 18, 2024: Plaintiffs Post-Trial Motions Fail in Kline
As expected, 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, $175 million, and $2.25 billion.
Plaintiff has a strong argument on appeal. 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. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, 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.
July 11, 2024 – MDL Updates
In the California MDL, 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.”
It sounds like a rhetorical question. There is no way to determine that. But the judge apparently wants an answer.
July 10, 2024 – Bayer Making Progress in Congress
The House Appropriations Committee recently cast their votes on the Fiscal Year 2025 Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies Appropriation Act, 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. Specifically, FIFRA (Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, 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.
In a clear display of partisan lines, all Democrats on the committee voted against the bill, citing concerns over corporate protections and the potential undermining of state-level regulatory efforts. Conversely, all Republicans voted in favor, 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. Furthermore, even if it were to overcome these hurdles, 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. Still, this is a concern.
July 4, 2024 – Philadelphia Case Dismissed
The next Philadelphia Roundup trial, set to start next week, 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. With only one count remaining, the plaintiff voluntarily dismissed the claim, although it looks like it will appeal.
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, but the survival action was not. 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.
June 29, 2024 – Bayer’s Bill Gets Past Congressional Subcommittee
Yesterday, the House Appropriations Subcommittee on Interior, Environment, 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.
June 28, 2024 – More on the Reduction of $2.5 Billion Verdict
In our June 5th update, 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.
I disagree. Juries are entrusted to assess the evidence, weigh the testimonies, 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. Certainly, $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).
June 27, 2024 – Texas Two Step
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. Subsequently, the subsidiary would file for bankruptcy, effectively isolating the parent company from the litigation claims.
It will not work in the end. But it could slow the litigation down. 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.)
June 26, 2024 – Bayer Lobbies for Law to Limit Roundup Lawsuits
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, drafted with Bayer’s help, which would limit the ability of plaintiffs to claim they were uninformed about the herbicide’s health risks.
As we have discussed, they are also targeting state legislatures as well. If passed, this legislation would significantly reduce Bayer’s legal liabilities and prevent future lawsuits.
This is scary because it is hard to trust Congress. Still, 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.”
June 12, 2024 – No New Jersey Roundup Class Action
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.
Why did the court deny consolidation? The court determined that the current number of cases did not justify a multiple-county litigation designation. As a result, 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.
June 7, 2024 – MDL Judge Questions Plaintiff Firms
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.
In every mass tort, 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.
Still, I do not think it is a big problem in this litigation. Moreover, defense lawyers have the solution to this problem in their hands: do not settle claims if they do not think the claims are compensable.
June 5, 2024 – Roundup Verdict Reduced to $400 Million
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.
May 23, 2024 – Existential Threat
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.
If you read these updates regularly, how long have I been saying this? I swear I think he stole it from me. I’ve also been saying, like he says, that Monsanto makes a lot of other quality products. It does innovate for farmers. 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. Yes, it will have to take some lumps and pay a lot of money in settlements. But isn’t that better than going bankrupt? That is where we are heading.
May 9, 2024 – Bayer Loses in Carson… Again
The 11th U.S. 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.
May 8, 2024 – New Roundup Lawsuit Filed in Delaware
Last week in Delaware state court, 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.
In February 2023, the arborist was diagnosed with Cutaneous T-Cell Lymphoma, a type of non-Hodgkin lymphoma. Since his diagnosis, he has endured significant and disabling physical injuries resulting from both the disease and its treatments. Throughout this difficult period, his wife has been his primary caretaker, 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.
April 6, 2024 – Billion Dollar Verdict Reduced
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.
Bayer will call it a win. Bayer stock yesterday jumped on the news. But let’s all agree a $611 million verdict is a darn good verdict.
April 2, 2024 – New Roundup Lawsuits
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. Obviously, 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. This is bad news for Bayer. But discontinuing the product or putting a warning on it would at least start the clock on the end of any Roundup litigation.
March 20, 2024 – Key Points in Kline Appeal
Plaintiff is appealing the defense verdict in Kline v. Roundup, the one defeat we have suffered in Philadelphia. There are three key points on appeal:
- Exclusion of Scientific Studies and Regulatory Critiques: The plaintiff argues that the court improperly limited evidence related to the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC)’s classification of glyphosate as a probable human carcinogen and a U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit ruling that identified issues with an EPA study. These exclusions prevented the jury from fully understanding the scientific and regulatory landscape surrounding glyphosate and Monsanto’s responses to it.
- Admission of EPA Findings: The court allowed the defense to introduce evidence from the EPA that deemed glyphosate safe. The plaintiff contends this was misleading – because it is – and that the EPA’s findings, which they argue were irrelevant to the claims of common-law negligence, gave undue weight to the defense’s argument on the safety of glyphosate.
- Amendment of Orders Regarding Evidence: The appeal also takes issue with the timing and manner in which evidentiary orders were amended, particularly those concerning the admissibility of the IARC study. The plaintiff argues that these amendments and the subsequent trial court rulings restricted their ability to counter Monsanto’s reliance on regulatory approvals and to present a comprehensive view of glyphosate’s potential health risks.
March 19, 2024 – Bayer Seeks Alternative to Glyphosate
Bayer officials announced they are exploring a potential alternative to glyphosate, the key component in Roundup weed killer, 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. Introducing a new version of Roundup, one without glyphosate, 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.
March 14, 2024 – Bayer Claims Bankruptcy Possible
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? Settlement. The one thing even a failed Texas Two-Step would do is temporarily slow things down. Now this is a threat that has some teeth. 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. In 2024, 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. If nothing else, this threat targets these lawyers to give them a little extra incentive to be flexible in settlement negotiations.
So, paradoxically, if you are looking for a tea leaf for a Monsanto Roundup settlement in 2024, I think we may have one here.
March 8, 2024 – California Plaintiff Quits in Middle of Trial
Geez. I had higher hopes for the four cases that were in trial. One mistrial, two defense verdicts, and now a plaintiff has quit mid-trial.
Why? I have no idea. 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. So you will keep seeing defense verdicts. But you also will see more billion dollar verdicts if this litigation drags on.
March 8, 2027 – Bayer CEO on Settlement
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, inside and outside the courtroom. 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. One, 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.
March 7, 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. So, the plaintiff will appeal evidentiary issues. You do not see any statements about unfair and biased judges like you see from Monsanto, right?
This Monsanto victory lowers the average Roundup verdict in Pennsylvania to $607 million.
March 5, 2024 – Monsanto Gets Win in Philadelphia
Monsanto got a win today in Kline v. Monsanto; it’s its first win in Philadelphia.
March 4, 2024 – Monsanto Gets a Win (and a Tie)
The Roundup wrongful death trial in Delaware (Cloud v. Monsanto) ended in a hung jury on Friday. After deliberating for three days, the jury advised the judge that they were deadlocked, and a mistrial was declared. Another Roundup trial in Arkansas ended last week in a defense verdict in Cody v. Monsanto.
Again, Monsanto will win some of these cases. 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, and we will have more verdicts soon. My prediction is we get another huge verdict in March.
March 1, 2024 – Consolidation of Roundup Cases in NJ State Courts Sought
As the Roundup litigation heats up, 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, for example, in Philadelphia.
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.
This is not a class action, each case would remain independent. 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.
February 1, 2024 – What Is at Stake for Bayer
Reuters has a quote that I think is really on point:
January 30, 2023 – $6.7 Billion in Roundup Verdicts
This is the updated scorecard of Roundup verdicts:
| 2024 | McKivision | Pennsylvania | $2.25B |
| 2023 | Jones | California | Defense Verdict |
| 2023 | Martel | Pennsylvania | $3.46M |
| 2023 | Anderson and Two Others | Missouri | $1.56B |
| 2023 | Dennis | California | $332M |
| 2023 | Caranci | Pennsylvania | $175M |
| 2023 | Durnell | Missouri | $1.25M |
| 2023 | McCostlin | Missouri | Defense Verdict |
| 2023 | Gordon | Missouri | Defense Verdict |
| 2022 | Ferro | Missouri | Defense Verdict |
| 2022 | Alesi | Missouri | Defense Verdict |
| 2022 | Johnson | Oregon | Defense Verdict |
| 2022 | Shelton | Missouri | Defense Verdict |
| 2021 | Stephens | California | Defense Verdict |
| 2021 | Clark | California | Defense Verdict |
| 2019 | Hardeman | MDL-CA | $80.2M |
| 2019 | Pilliod | California | $2.05B |
| 2018 | Johnson | California | $289.2M |
The average payout for the last six Roundup lawsuits that went to trial, including a zero for the defense verdict, is a stunning $617,387,142.86.
January 26, 2024 – McKivision Verdict
The verdict is back in McKivision: $2.25 billion. The jury awarded $250 million in compensatory damages and $2 billion in punitive damages.
This was an educated jury. Half of the 12 jurors were college-educated, and two had master’s degrees. Plaintiffs’ arguments are working in front of men, women, educated, uneducated, you name it. 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. I keep saying this verdict, and that verdict is a game changer, and we go back to business as usual. But this may be the verdict that turns the tide.
January 24, 2024 – Monsanto Struggles with Witness
After a series of losses, Monsanto tried out a new toxicologist, David Saltmiras, in the McKivision trial yesterday. Losing five trials in a row makes you want to try a new path.
It did not go well for Monsanto. Its lawyers tried—pushing the envelope like they pathologically do—to convert a fact witness into an expert witness, fusing opinions into his testimony. This did not please the plaintiff’s attorneys or Judge Susan I. Schulman, who moved to shut such testimony down.
January 11, 2024 – Monsanto’s “Cynical Diversion”
One leitmotif in these comments is my complaint that Monsanto, for lack of a better phrase, is such a baby when it loses.
Judge James Crumlish III of the Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas agrees. 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.
Again, this is not a one-off. Monsanto has previously attempted to disqualify judges in other cases, alleging bias against their defense. 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. If you disagree with me, it must be because you are acting in bad faith.
Why does any of this really matter? Who cares if a defendant is being a baby? 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.
2023 Updates
Roundup Update December 6, 2023
Bayer loses. Again. Yesterday, 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. The verdict, 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.
In 15 trials, juries awarded victims a few thousand dollars shy of $4.5 billion. So, the average Roundup verdict is $300 million. If you multiply $300 million by the estimated 40,000 remaining cases, you get $12 trillion. (This is a little misleading because of trials with multiple plaintiffs, but you get the idea.)
Bayer CEO Bill Anderson has a degree from MIT and has had great success as a CEO in his two previous pharmaceutical company stints, which is how he earned the Bayer job. He pledged to study the company before taking action. The time for action is now. Because that train of success will come to a screeching halt if he does not find a way to settle the Roundup lawsuits.
Roundup Update November 20, 2023
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.
The state court in Jefferson City, Missouri, awarded the plaintiffs a combined $61.1 million in actual damages and $500 million each in punitive damages.
Valorie Gunther from New York, Jimmy Draeger from Missouri, 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. Bayer keeps waiting to settle, hoping something good will happen. This is going from bad to worse to – I’ll say it again, existential threat – for Bayer.
We will get another verdict in Philadelphia in Martel v. Nouryon Chemicals, probably early next month. Bayer should settle that case today. But it won’t.
Roundup Update November 10, 2023
Bayer is not ready to settle. 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, particularly those involving glyphosate, its active ingredient, asserting to juries that the herbicide is safe when used as instructed.
I mean, what else is it going to say? The company cannot say, “We are getting hammered again, we will make reasonable settlement offers, I hope the plaintiffs agree. But AG’s Chief Financial Officer, Wolfgang Nickl, said something else interesting: “We have no appetite to write humongous checks and in a time where we have little free cash flow.”
When I was in college, I would get parking tickets at school. My plan for those parking tickets was to put them in my glovebox and try to forget about them. That is what Bayer is doing here. We do not have the money, so we will not pay it. But this is precisely what I did in college. These chickens will come home to roost. The problem is only going to get bigger.
Roundup Update November 9, 2023
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. Very desperate argument. Judges always do this, and they have every right to do it.
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. It has requested Judge James C. 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.
Roundup Update November 7, 2023
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.
Judge Mary M. Schroeder dissented, 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.
Roundup Update November 6, 2023
Philadelphia is gearing up for its second trial concerning allegations that the herbicide Roundup causes cancer, scheduled to start today.
Martel v. Nouryon Chemicals will be the first time Pennsylvania-based chemical manufacturer, Nouryon Chemicals, is a defendant at trial. 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. After a holiday break, the next trial is set for January 8, and we will see more trials in Missouri and California state courts. Unless there is a big settlement, we are just getting started.
Roundup Update November 4, 2023
To put it in context, Bayer is worth $44 billion (much less than it paid for Monsanto). In five days, Bayer absorbed two verdicts against Monsanto totaling over $500 million. So those two cases, 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. If Bayer does not act on settlement, things could spiral out of control pretty quickly. Bayer has to acknowledge that its playbook in this litigation is not working.
If you read these updates, I complimented many times Bayer’s strategy of letting the weakest cases go to trial, get defense verdicts, and quell the enthusiasm of plaintiffs lawyers. It worked. But it is just not a sustainable strategy. 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.
Roundup Update November 2, 2023
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.
Of course, the pressure of recent juries in Missouri, Pennsylvania, and California totaling over $500 million has changed the landscape. Plaintiffs’ lawyers want fair Roundup settlement offers and, at a minimum, a reasonable warning on the product.
Here is a quote from a Cornell professor:
“What’s surprising is they didn’t settle these cases. If I were Monsanto, 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, too. But they made a mistake.”
But, actually, this is how Monsanto won nine in a row, doing exactly this. But Bayer did not want to overpay, and plaintiffs’ demands for settlement were just too high.
Bayer is said to be weighing bankruptcy. But I don’t think they really are. One option is the Texas Two-Step. 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.
Bayer could declare bankruptcy. But I do not think a single person within Bayer is really considering this as an option.
I laid out the plan a few days ago. Settle these cases. Put a warning on the product. And get back to ruling the agricultural world.
Roundup Update October 31, 2023
$332 million in Dennis. 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.
Yes, Bayer won nine trials in a row. We kept telling you it was smoke and mirrors – they are letting weak cases go to trial. These last three verdicts prove this hypothesis.
Like Caranci, there was nothing unusual about Mr. Dennis’s case. 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.
Roundup Update October 28, 2023
$175 million verdict in Caranci!!!!
Roundup Update October 25, 2023
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.
RoundUp Litigation in 2025
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 identification of glyphosate as a possible carcinogen led to a wave of Roundup lawsuits by plaintiffs claiming that their use of Roundup caused them to develop lymphoma (and other diseases). Eventually, every Roundup lawsuit in federal courts was consolidated into a new mass tort MDL in the Northern District of California. The Roundup MDL gradually grew to over 100,000 cases, with thousands of additional Roundup cases pending in state courts in California.
Huge Roundup Verdicts Broke Monsanto’s Resolve
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, and when the evidence became clear, Monsanto stuck their heads in the sand. I’m convinced this is how history will write this story.
After years of discovery, that unshakable resolve crumbled. 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. Eventually, they set aside $16 billion to cover settlements of pending claims.
Most Pending Roundup Cases Have Been Settled
In March 2022, Bayer, which owns Roundup and Monsanto, 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. In 2025, there are approximately 67,000 open Roundup lawsuits.
Points System for Monsanto’s Roundup Settlement
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, treatment outcome, age of the victim, estimated earnings capacity, etc., are awarded point scores. 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.
The Future of Roundup Lawsuits
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. Supreme Court. 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.
Initially, 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. First, 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. Bayer has been appealing the Hardeman, 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. Now Bayer is asking the U.S. Supreme Court to consider the issue. In August, 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.)
Roundup Lawsuit Questions and Answers
What is the average payout for a Roundup lawsuit?
The average settlement payouts for Roundup lawsuits in the first settlement was between 100,000 to $160,000. Our lawyers hope for more in the second round of settlements after all of these huge verdicts in 2023 to 2025. Is that realistic? Probably not.
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.
Earlier in 2024, 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, to be honest, with the recent 3rd Circuit opinion and a few of the recent verdicts. But we are taking about average Roundup settlements. Like the last settlement, you can expect there of be a significant range around that average figure.
How many Roundup lawsuits have been settled?
We don’t know for certain how many Roundup lawsuits have been settled. In April 2025, our Roundup NHL lawyers estimate that over 67,000 Roundup lawsuits are still pending in state and local courts.
Where This Litigation Stands in April 2025
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.
How did we get here?
Lawsuits began to pile up, and by 2018, the first major trial—Johnson v. 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. Monsanto. Those verdicts, though reduced on appeal, sent shockwaves through Bayer and exposed years of internal documents showing efforts to downplay risks and manipulate scientific research.
By 2020, 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, length of exposure, age, and other factors.
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. The court rejected that proposal.
Juries across the country resumed hammering the company with massive verdicts:
These are not anomalies. Plaintiffs have now won a bunch of Roundup trials with billions in verdicts. Bayer’s courtroom strategy—denial, deflection, and over-reliance on outdated EPA guidance—has lost credibility with juries.
Bayer has set aside another $5.9 billion to cover future liability. Given recent verdicts, that reserve may prove inadequate.
Now, in 2025, 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.
Behind the scenes, settlement talks are happening again. 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.
Call a Roundup Lawyer Today
If you need a Roundup lawyer to fight against Monsanto, call us today at 800-553-8082. There is a deadline to file, which is a really big deal. We just saw what was likely to be a great case get dismissed in Philadelphia on the statute of limitation. So call our lawyers or call another lawyer today. Don’t wait. You can also reach out to us online.