Bayer is attempting to reverse an $80 million trial verdict that was won in the first Roundup cancer lawsuit to go to trial in a federal multidistrict litigation.

Lawyers for the Monsanto parent company recently filed their request with the federal court overseeing several other Roundup cancer lawsuits. According to the company, the $80 million verdict that resulted from the first trial in the multidistrict litigation is contradicted by regulatory opinions and scientific evidence.

According to the New York Times, the jury awarded the multimillion-dollar verdict to plaintiff Edwin H., a 70-year-old man who claimed to have developed non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma in 2015 after using Roundup around his property for 26 years.

$75 million of the award was punitive damage, $5 million was compensation for past and future suffering, and $200,000 was awarded to compensate Edwin for his medical expenses.

In the Roundup cancer lawsuit, Edwin was reportedly allowed to reference the opinion of the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), a United Nations agency which classifies glyphosate as “probably carcinogenic.”

Despite this, Monsanto was reportedly not allowed to reference the findings of other regulatory bodies when arguing their case. Bayer’s lawyers claim that this double standard was part of the reason that they lost the trial.

In April 2019, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) spoke in favor of glyphosate-based herbicides such as Roundup. The agency made its statement after reviewing and reassessing the safety of the chemical.

“EPA continues to find that there are no risks to public health when glyphosate is used in accordance with its current label and that glyphosate is not a carcinogen,” the agency said in its statement.

“The agency’s scientific findings on human health risk are consistent with the conclusions of science reviews by many other countries and other federal agencies.”

Bayer has relied heavily on the EPA’s safety analysis of glyphosate when arguing in other lawsuits regarding their Roundup herbicide. However, the company’s lawyers were reportedly unable to do so based on the decision of U.S. District Judge Vince Chhabria.

Bayer also claims that the plaintiffs violated one of Chhabria’s own pretrial rulings that prevented them from making claims about two cited studies. The plaintiffs were reportedly not allowed to assert that two of their presented studies showed that glyphosate doubled the risk of cancer for individuals who used Roundup for more than 2 days a year or for more than 10 days in a lifetime.

Despite this barring, plaintiff’s counsel allegedly mentioned a “more than twofold” increase in risk during their opening and closing statements.

The Roundup cancer lawsuit is not the first case to result in a multimillion-dollar verdict although it is the first verdict to come out of federal court. A $289 million verdict was reached in a San Francisco Superior Court trial, although that award was later cut to $78 million.

Another state court trial ended in $2 billion in punitive damages awarded to a couple that allegedly both developed non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma after using the glyphosate-based Roundup product.

If you or a loved one developed cancer after using Roundup as a farm worker or home gardener, you may have a legal claim. Legal migrant farm workers may also seek help. Learn more by filling out the form on this page for a FREE case evaluation.

Learn More