As the class-action lawsuit against Bayer moves along, lawyers for the plaintiffs are accusing the company of a “Pay to Appeal” scheme. According to the plaintiffs’ lawyers’ letter to the court, the strategy by Bayer is to obtain a favorable ruling, which the attorneys say is manufactured and could erode the U.S. justice system if it is permitted.
The next Roundup™ Monsanto trial is slated for August 19 in St. Louis County Court, several miles from the corporation’s campus. The fact that it is in Monsanto’s hometown is important. Here, corporate executives can be ordered to appear at trial and testify. This is the first case for Monsanto outside of California. It is also the first case after the stunning $2 billion loss to a California couple in a Monsanto trial. They claimed that they developed non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma after using Roundup™ for 30 years. That was the eighth largest amount ever to be awarded in a defective product case.
U.S. District Judge Vince Chhabria issued a formal mediation order to Monsanto/Bayer and plaintiff attorneys on April 12. Mediation is a valuable tool in many court cases. The goal here is to reach a settlement between Monsanto/Bayer and those who developed cancer from Roundup™. Lawyers will represent greater than 1,000 individuals in the settlement talks. In his order, Chhabria said that both sides could propose a mediator. If they can’t agree on one, the court will appoint a mediator.
The latest Roundup™ cancer case is about to take center stage when it resumes on April 2. The case is scheduled at the Oakland Superior Court in Alameda County. The Pilliod v Monsanto trial is one of several cases that have been grouped together under the California Roundup™ Judicial Council Coordination Proceedings. Opening statements ended on March 28. Plaintiffs plan to resume with testimony from a toxicology expert. The trial concerns a couple, both of whom believe they developed cancer from the use of Roundup™. The new Roundup™ cancer case will last until May. This latest case comes into court with strong prior victories in two others.
Roundup™ trial developments in the Edwin Hardeman case are being watched by scores of other potential plaintiffs. The trial remains in Phase 1 as of Friday, March 9. This phase has been set to establish medical causation. The judge told attorneys for Monsanto and the plaintiff that he would like to see Phase 1 conclude by the following week in order to proceed to phase 2 where damages would be determined. Attorneys for the plaintiff rested their case on Friday, making room for Monsanto to present its Phase 1 arguments. The Roundup™ trial developments are particularly crucial in this case, since in order for the trial to proceed to Phase 2, the jury must unanimously decide that Roundup™ was the cause of Hardeman’s cancer. However, before proceeding, the judge will allow debate over differences present in the trial instructions for Phase 1.
A new Roundup™ case began on February 25, 2019, in a San Francisco federal court. It is the first case against Monsanto/Bayer to be heard at the federal level and involved a 70-year-old Santa Rosa man who developed non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma after using the pesticide. The new Roundup™ case is seen as a test for bigger litigation in the future. There are upwards of 9,000 cases currently waiting to go to trial, and 760 of them are grouped in the San Francisco federal courts. The jurors will not be given all the evidence at the start as they were in the Dewayne Johnson trial in 2018. Judge Chhabria, who is hearing the case, said that the evidence may be a distraction in the initial phase. If this phase is decided in the plaintiff’s favor, the evidence will be heard in Phase 2.
A new lawsuit targets Roundup’s capability of destroying more than weeds. The lawsuit, which represents multiple consumers, says that Roundup™ targets good gut bacteria. In recent years, the presence of good bacteria in the intestines has been linked to prevention of numerous maladies including heart disease, gluten intolerance, and depression. The suggestion that Roundup™ targets good gut bacteria and leads to additional medical problems is alarming.
It was 1970 when Monsanto chemist John Franz made a groundbreaking discovery that changed the course of weed killing as we know it. He figured out that glyphosate was an incredibly strong herbicide that can kill virtually any type of plant material out there. Shortly after the company’s discovery, they branded their “miracle” weed killer product under the name Roundup™.
The first federal Roundup™ trial is rapidly approaching. It is slated to begin on February 25 in San Francisco. The case, Edwin Hardeman v. Monsanto, is the first out of 620 that are pending federal litigation. In pretrial motions, attorneys for Bayer and the plaintiff have laid out a list of issues, and evidence that they feel should be excluded. Also, a joint exhibit list was filed on February 6 that detailed all evidence that would be presented during the trial.
A Roundup™ formulation ban decision in France due to safety concerns was hailed by critics of the weed killer as the first step in banning all Roundup™ products in France. A French court in Lyons banned the sale of Roundup 360™ in the country effective January 15. This ruling comes in response to worries that safety concerns were ignored when Roundup™ was cleared for use in the past. The biggest issue is the well-founded belief that glyphosate causes cancer. Let’s look at why the use, distribution, and sale of Roundup™ 360 was forbidden in France and how this impacts Roundup™ usage worldwide.
Sacramento Injury Attorneys Blog