Monsanto Roundup Lawsuit

Table of Contents

Primary Item (H2)Sub Item 1 (H3)Sub Item 2 (H4)
Sub Item 3 (H5)
Sub Item 4 (H6)

Wisner Baum’s attorneys are no longer accepting new Roundup cases, but our firm played a leading role in some of the most significant Monsanto/Bayer litigation outcomes to date — helping to negotiate over $11 billion in settlements and securing multi‑billion‑dollar jury verdicts on behalf of clients.

Roundup is a widely used herbicide whose active ingredient is glyphosate. The International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) — part of the World Health Organization — classifies glyphosate as a probable human carcinogen. Thousands of people across the U.S. have alleged that long‑term exposure to glyphosate (in Roundup and similar products) caused them to develop non‑Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) and other serious illnesses.

Reach out to our attorneys today for more information.

Current Litigation Status (2026)

Here is a summary of the Roundup lawsuits, which are ongoing:

Monsanto/Bayer has faced over 192,000 Roundup lawsuits since the start of litigation. As of 2026, 131,000 cases have either been settled or deemed ineligible.
Wisner Baum helped negotiate Roundup settlement agreements worth approximately $11 billion, resolving roughly 60% of cases.
Wisner Baum managing partner R. Brent Wisner was co-lead trial counsel in two of the first three Roundup cancer lawsuits to go before juries. The trials culminated in jury verdicts worth over $2.3 billion.
Roundup cancer attorneys have obtained roughly $6 billion in combined jury verdicts in 2024 and 2025.
Bayer estimates that there are over 61,000 pending Roundup lawsuits.

Types of Cancer in Roundup Litigation

Roundup cancer lawsuits have been filed for plaintiffs who developed:

B cell non-Hodgkin lymphoma
T cell non-Hodgkin lymphoma
Diffuse large B cell lymphoma (DLBCL)
Chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL)
Small lymphocytic lymphoma (SLL)
Follicular lymphoma
Mantle cell lymphoma (MCL)
Hairy cell leukemia (HCL)
Burkitt lymphoma

Glyphosate Side Effects

Scientists have been able to correlate a number of health issues related to glyphosate exposure, including, but not limited to:

ADHD: The journal Environmental Health Perspectives reported in 2002 that exposure to Roundup [glyphosate herbicide] was linked to attention deficit disorder (ADHD), likely due to the herbicide’s capacity to disrupt thyroid hormone functions.

Alzheimer’s Disease: A study published in the journal Toxicology found that glyphosate exposure can cause the same kind of oxidative stress and neural cell death found in Alzheimer’s diagnosis. It also affects CaMKII, an enzyme whose dysregulation has also been linked to Alzheimer’s.

Autism: A research scientist at MIT says exposure to glyphosate has a number of biological effects that align with known pathologies associated with autism. One of the parallels is gut dysbiosis among children with autism and glyphosate’s suppression of pathogenic bacteria. Glyphosate also promotes the accumulation of aluminum in the brain. Aluminum is a neurotoxin and the established cause of dialysis dementia.

Birth Defects: Glyphosate exposure can disrupt the Vitamin A signaling pathway, which is critical for normal fetal development. A study from Paraguay found that babies born to women living less than a mile from fields sprayed with glyphosate herbicide were more than twice as likely to develop birth defects.

Cancer: The International Agency of Research on Cancer (an agency within the World Health Organization) published a study in 2015 that determined glyphosate is a probable human carcinogen. There is also a meta-analysis study from 2014 published in International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health and a 2008 Swedish study that link glyphosate and non-Hodgkin lymphoma. Other studies, including a study in Argentina of 65,000 people in farming communities where Roundup is used (communities referred to as “the fumigated towns”), found cancer rates to be two to four times higher than the country’s national average.

Specifically, the study noted increases in breast, prostate and lung cancers. In a comparison of two farming communities—one that sprayed Roundup and another that didn’t—31 percent of residents in the Roundup sprayed community had a family member with cancer. In the community that didn’t spray, only three percent of residents had a family member with cancer.

Celiac Disease: A study of fish exposed to glyphosate herbicide showed that some developed digestive problems similar to those with Celiac Disease. Parallels between glyphosate exposure and Celiac Disease include impairment in enzymes critical to detoxifying environmental toxins, imbalances in gut bacteria, amino acid depletion and certain mineral deficiencies.

Colitis: A Roundup study titled ‘The Effect of Glyphosate on Potential Pathogens and Beneficial Members of Poultry Microbiota in Vitro’ found that glyphosate toxicity could be a significant predisposing factor in the overgrowth of clostridia, an established causal factor in colitis.

Heart Disease: A study published in Entropy found that glyphosate exposure can cause disruption to the body’s enzymes, causing lysosomal dysfunction, which is a factor in heart failure and cardiovascular disease.

Inflammatory Bowel Disease: In the same Entropy study, researchers found that exposure to glyphosate creates a severe tryptophan deficiency in some, which can cause inflammatory bowel disease.

Kidney Disease: Glyphosate herbicide exposure may explain the recent spike in kidney disease statistics among farm workers in India, Central America and Sri Lanka. According to the International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health: “Although glyphosate alone does not cause an epidemic of chronic kidney disease, it seems to have acquired the ability to destroy the renal tissues of thousands of farmers.”

Liver Disease: A 2009 study showed that very low doses of glyphosate can disrupt liver cell function.

Non-Hodgkin Lymphoma: A paper analyzing nearly 30 years of research on the relationship between Non-Hodgkin Lymphoma (NHL) and occupational exposure to pesticides found a positive association between glyphosate herbicide exposure and B cell lymphoma.

Parkinson’s Disease: Several lab studies show that glyphosate can induce the cell death characteristic of Parkinson’s.

Roundup Settlement Update

Since the $10.9 billion Roundup settlement in 2020, there have not been any additional reported settlements between plaintiffs and Bayer, though that could change. Trials in the Roundup litigation are ongoing. Other recent verdicts and settlements include:

Barnes v. Monsanto Co. (2025) – $2.065 billion
McKivison v. Monsanto Co. (2024) – $2.25 billion, reduced to $400 million
Anderson et al. v. Monsanto Co. (2023) – $1.56 billion

See full year‑by‑year roundup in section below.

Roundup Verdict Amounts

Since 2018, there have been over two dozen Roundup trials. The majority of cases culminated in wins for Bayer/Monsanto. However, plaintiffs have prevailed in at least 10 trials with jury verdicts in the billions.

2025 Roundup Verdicts

Barnes v. Monsanto Co.

Plaintiff: John Barnes
Verdict: $2.065 billion ($65 million in compensatory damages and
$2 billion in punitive damages)

2024 Roundup Verdicts

Melissen v. Monsanto Co.

Plaintiff: William and Margaret Melissen
Verdict: $78 million ($3 million in compensatory damages and $75 million in punitive damages)

Young v. Monsanto Co.

Plaintiff: Ryan Young
Verdict: Monsanto/Bayer Win

Purnell v. Monsanto Co.

Plaintiff: Debra Purnell
Verdict: Case discontinued by plaintiff

Kline v. Monsanto Co.

Plaintiff: Carl Kline
Verdict: Monsanto/Bayer Win

Cloud v. Monsanto Co.

Plaintiff: Family of Anthony Cloud (wrongful death)
Verdict: Mistrial

Cody v. Monsanto Co.

Plaintiff: Family of Wanda Cody (wrongful death)
Verdict: Monsanto/Bayer Win

McKivison v. Monsanto Co.

Plaintiff: John McKivison
Verdict: $2.25 billion ($250 million in compensatory damages and $2 billion in punitive damages), later reduced to $400 million on appeal2023 ROUNDUP VERDICTS

Jones v. Monsanto Co.

Plaintiff: Bruce Jones
Verdict: Monsanto/Bayer Win

Martel v. Monsanto Co.

Plaintiff: Kelly Jo Martel
Verdict: $3.5 million ($462,500 in compensatory damages and $3 million in punitive damages)

Anderson et. al v. Monsanto Co.

Plaintiffs: Daniel Anderson, Jimmy Draeger, and Valorie Gunther
Verdict: $1.56 billion total ($61 million in compensatory damages and $1.5 billion in punitive damages)
- Anderson: $538 million ($38 million compensatory + $500 million punitive)
- Draeger: $517.5 million ($17.5 million compensatory + $500 million punitive)
- Gunther: $505.6 million ($5.6 million compensatory + $500 million punitive)

Dennis v. Monsanto Co.

Plaintiff: Michael “Mike” Dennis
Verdict: $332 million ($7 million in compensatory damages and $325 million in punitive damages), later reduced to $28 million

Caranci v. Monsanto Co.

Plaintiffs: Ernest Caranci and his wife Carmela Caranci
Verdict: $175 million ($25 million in compensatory damages and $150 million in punitive damages)

Durnell v. Monsanto Co.

Plaintiff: John L. Durnell
Verdict: $1.25 million in compensatory damages upheld on appeal in 2025

McCostlin v. Monsanto Co.

Plaintiff: Mark McCostlin
Verdict: Monsanto/Bayer Win

Gordon v. Monsanto Co.

Plaintiff: Sharlean Gordon
Verdict: Monsanto/Bayer Win

2022 Roundup Verdicts

Alesi v. Monsanto Co.

Plaintiffs: Carl Alesi (lead plaintiff) and two additional plaintiffs
Verdict: Monsanto/Bayer Win

Johnson v. Monsanto Co.

Plaintiffs: Larry and Gayle Johnson
Verdict: Monsanto/Bayer Win

Shelton v. Monsanto Co.

Plaintiff: Allan Shelton
Verdict: Monsanto/Bayer Win

Stephens v. Monsanto Co.

Plaintiff: Donnetta Stephens
Verdict: Monsanto/Bayer Win

2021 Round up Verdicts

Clark v. Monsanto Co.

Plaintiffs: Destiny Clark, on behalf of her son Ezra
Verdict: Monsanto/Bayer Win

2019 Roundup Verdicts

Pilliod v. Monsanto Co.

Plaintiffs: Alva and Alberta Pilliod
Verdict: $2.055 billion total ($55 million in compensatory damages and $2 billion in punitive damages), later reduced to $87 million.

Hardeman v. Monsanto Co.

Plaintiff: Edwin Hardeman
Verdict: $80.2 million ($5.2 million in compensatory damages and $75 million in punitive damages), later reduced to $25.2 million.

2018 Roundup Verdicts

Johnson v. Monsanto Co.

Plaintiff: Dewayne “Lee” Johnson
Verdict: $289.2 million ($39.25 million in compensatory damages and $250 million in punitive damages), later reduced to $20.5 million on appeal.

Monsanto Roundup Lawsuit Update 2025

The Roundup lawyers at Wisner Baum have not been involved in the Roundup litigation since the $10.9 billion settlement reached in 2020.

January 7, 2026: The case total in the Roundup MDL did not change much to start 2026. Three total cases were added, bringing the MDL total to 4,511 pending cases.

December 30, 2025: U.S. District Judge Vince Chhabria approved a survival and wrongful death settlement in Roundup MDL-2741, which now includes 4,508 pending cases and 5,236 total actions. He also denied Monsanto's motion for leave to file reconsideration in multiple Wave 8 cases. Plaintiff Phillip Dressel filed a second motion to remand to state court on December 23, with a hearing set for January 29, 2026.

December 26, 2025: Judge Chhabria issued the settlement approval order (Dkt. 21694) and the denial order (Dkt. 21693).

December 23, 2025: Dressel filed the remand motion (Dkt. 21692), supported by declarations and exhibits from depositions and hearings.

December 18, 2025: Monsanto filed answers to complaints, corporate disclosures identifying Bayer AG as an affiliate, and certificates of interested entities for plaintiffs including Francis Mula, Freddie O'Neal, and others (Dkts. 21685-21690). Plaintiff Denise Surette filed an administrative motion to relate cases (Dkt. 21691).

December 16, 2025: Plaintiff Lynn Johnson filed a stipulation for dismissal with prejudice (Dkt. 21684).

December 12, 2025: Monsanto filed additional answers and disclosures for plaintiffs like Dennis Lennard, Walter Hoeft, Jeffrey Biles, Edmond Smith, and Joanne Gyure (Dkts. 21668-21682). The MDL Panel issued a remand order for Kelly-Leppert v. Monsanto (Dkt. 21667) and a transfer order (Dkt. 21683).

November 5, 2025: The Roundup multidistrict litigation (MDL-2741) now includes 4,490 pending cases, with 18 new cases added in October alone. The total number of actions in the MDL stands at 5,218, reflecting ongoing filings and consolidation of claims.

October 30, 2025: A hearing was held on the investor class action seeking final approval of a $38 million settlement, alleging Bayer misled shareholders about litigation risks tied to Monsanto’s Roundup and downplayed related liabilities during its 2018 acquisition. The case is separate from the ongoing Roundup cancer lawsuits, which focus on health-related claims rather than investor losses.

October 8, 2025: The Roundup multidistrict litigation (MDL) remains active with 4,472 cases pending as of early October. While federal case filings continue at a slow pace, much of the recent activity has shifted to state courts, where plaintiffs have secured significant verdicts and settlements.

October 2, 2025: U.S. District Judge Vince Chhabria issued a new order clarifying the admissibility of expert witnesses in the Roundup litigation. The ruling emphasized that Rule 26 reports must stand on their own and that depositions cannot fill in gaps, resulting in some experts being excluded for insufficient analysis while others remain eligible to testify.

October 1, 2025: Bayer investors seek final approval of a $38 million settlement alleging the company misled shareholders about litigation risks tied to Monsanto’s Roundup and downplayed related liabilities during its 2018 acquisition of Monsanto. While the case involves Bayer’s handling of Roundup-related disclosures, it is separate from the ongoing Roundup cancer lawsuits, which focus on health-related claims rather than investor losses. A hearing on the investor class action is scheduled for October 30, 2025.

September 11, 2025: Our law firm has consistently championed transparency and corporate accountability, as evidenced by our work in the Roundup litigation. While we have not been involved in these cases since 2020, we are raising urgent concerns about emerging state and federal legislation we feel is designed to shield pesticide manufacturers from legal accountability.

Right now, Congress is considering language that would effectively prohibit municipal, state, and federal governments from enforcing pesticide warning laws aimed at keeping people safe. It would also prohibit legal cases like those filed by individuals harmed by Roundup (glyphosate) – cases we brought before juries and won over $2 billion in combined verdicts – from being pursued in the future.

“If these laws had been in place in 2018, Johnson's case would have been thrown out before the first witness took the stand," said Wisner Baum senior partner, Michael L. Baum. "There would have been no verdict, no Monsanto Papers, and no public reckoning. Corporate misconduct would have stayed hidden."

Read more about the new industry-backed legislation that could give pesticide companies immunity from toxic torts in our press release.

September 4, 2025: A California federal judge granted a request from plaintiffs' lead counsel in the Roundup cancer litigation to intervene in a separate legal matter involving investors alleging Bayer misled them about the risks of the Monsanto acquisition. Attorneys sought documents to scrutinize what Bayer knew about the Roundup litigation risks and alleged misconduct before finalizing the $63 billion acquisition. The hope is that internal documents may provide new evidence about what both companies knew regarding the risks of Roundup.

August 8, 2025: Bayer announced last week that it has allocated an additional $1.37 billion to address the ongoing Roundup cancer litigation. The company has already paid out over $10 billion in Roundup settlements alleging its glyphosate-based herbicide causes cancer.

In an earnings call, Bayer CEO Bill Anderson said the company will “significantly contain” glyphosate litigation by the end of next year. Anderson added that Bayer is expecting word from the Solicitor General as to whether SCOTUS will take up a Roundup case “in the coming weeks or months.” This summer, the Supreme Court asked the Solicitor General for input on the case in which a plaintiff in Missouri state court alleged his non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma was caused by Roundup exposure.

“This decision keeps intact the broader timeline of having a SCOTUS ruling by summer of next year,” Anderson said.

July 7, 2025: Bayer estimates that over 60,000 cases are pending in the Roundup litigation, including claims filed in state and federal courts.

June 30, 2025: The U.S. Supreme Court requested that the Solicitor General provide the federal government's views on Bayer's petition in the Durnell v. Monsanto case. This is one of the most important developments in the Roundup litigation since the $11 billion settlement in 2020.

Bayer's petition centers on whether the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) preempts state failure-to-warn claims related to Roundup. The company argues that federal law should shield it from state lawsuits since the EPA approved Roundup's labeling without requiring cancer warnings.

The Supreme Court's request for the Solicitor General's input signals serious consideration of the case, which could fundamentally alter the litigation landscape. Bayer CEO Bill Anderson called this "an encouraging step," noting that a favorable ruling could largely end the Roundup litigation.

May 28, 2025: The Missouri Court of Appeals affirmed a $611 million verdict awarded to three plaintiffs who alleged Roundup caused their non-Hodgkin lymphoma. The court rejected Bayer's arguments about federal preemption and improper expert testimony, reinforcing the viability of state-law claims.

May 15, 2025: Reuters reports that Bayer is planning to settle some Roundup cases in Missouri. If unsuccessful, the company may file for bankruptcy for its Monsanto unit.

The German multinational corporation estimates it faces 67,000 cases and has set aside $5.9 billion to cover the legal costs.

May 9, 2025: The Pennsylvania Superior Court affirmed a $177.3 million judgment awarded to Roundup plaintiff Ernest Caranci and his wife. The three-judge panel rejected all of Monsanto's grounds for appeal, including claims that the verdict was excessive. Most notably, the court rejected Monsanto's argument that the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) preempted state-law failure to warn claims.

The original verdict came in 2023 after Caranci developed non-Hodgkin's lymphoma following years of Roundup use. The case (Caranci v. Monsanto) included claims of negligence, strict liability for defective design, and failure to warn.

More than 4,400 Roundup lawsuits are pending in the federal MDL. State court litigation continues to drive the overall Roundup litigation landscape, with recent plaintiff verdicts maintaining pressure on Bayer to resolve remaining claims.

Roundup lawyers note that while Bayer has won numerous defense verdicts, the string of significant plaintiff victories like the Caranci case and the massive Georgia verdict a couple of months ago demonstrate the multinational corporation remains vulnerable to court losses as the litigation drags on.

April 30, 2025: Bayer has renewed its efforts to seek Supreme Court review in the Roundup litigation, arguing that federal law preempts state failure-to-warn claims because the EPA doesn't require a cancer warning label. The Supreme Court previously rejected similar arguments, and legal observers note that the chances of the Court intervening now are slim.

On the legislative front, North Dakota introduced House Bill 1318, which opponents describe as a dangerous, sweeping immunity bill that would block lawsuits brought by individuals alleging harm from pesticides and herbicides. We believe this bill prioritizes corporate interests over public health and consumer protection by preventing people from bringing a case to court when corporations make products that cause harm.

As for upcoming Roundup trials, there are a couple scheduled in May in St. Louis and another multi-plaintiff case scheduled to begin in June in Chicago.

March 24, 2025: A Georgia jury delivered a massive blow to Bayer, ordering the company to pay over $2 billion in damages to John Barnes. Mr. Barnes alleged in his lawsuit that he developed non-Hodgkin's lymphoma after using Roundup.

The jury awarded him $65 million in compensatory damages and $2 billion in punitive damages.

Bayer continues to dispute claims that Roundup causes cancer and has announced plans to appeal the verdict. Despite numerous jury verdicts and its setting aside some $16 billion to settle cases, Bayer continues to “stand fully behind the safety” of its glyphosate-based herbicides.

February 12, 2025: The Roundup MDL before Judge Vince Chhabria in Northern California now has 4,414 pending cases. While new cases continue to be filed in the MDL, there continues to be a notable shift toward state court filings where Roundup cancer attorneys have earned several significant verdicts since 2023.

January 4, 2025: Monsanto appealed a $175 million jury verdict in favor of plaintiff Ernest Caranci. The company challenged several aspects of the 2023 trial, including jury instructions and evidentiary rulings, and cited the Third Circuit's Schaffner decision regarding preemption of failure-to-warn claims.

December 3, 2024: Only 18 cases were added to the Monsanto Roundup MDL last month, bringing the case total to 4,373.

November 1, 2024: There are still thousands of Roundup cases in the MDL. As of today, 4,355 federal cases are pending.

October 11, 2024: A Philadelphia jury has ordered Bayer to pay $78 million to a Pennsylvania resident who developed cancer after using the company's controversial Roundup herbicide. The verdict, including $3 million in compensatory damages and $75 million in punitive damages, interrupts Bayer's recent courtroom wins in Philadelphia. While the agrochemical company had previously prevailed in 14 of 20 Roundup trials, this latest decision adds to a series of substantial verdicts against the company, including a $1.56 billion judgment from November 2023 (later reduced to $611 million) and a $2.25 billion verdict from January 2024 (subsequently reduced to $400 million).

October 1, 2024: The total number of cases in the federal Roundup MDL is now 4,349. However, most new Roundup lawsuits are filed in state courts, not the MDL.

September 28, 2024: The Third Circuit Court of Appeals refused to change its decision from last month that federal law overrides a Pennsylvania law requiring cancer warnings on chemicals.

September 16, 2024: A new Roundup trial, Melissen v. Monsanto, is underway in Philadelphia. The trial is expected to take weeks. We will report on any news once the trial concludes.

September 12, 2024: The Philadelphia jury in Young v. Monsanto found that Monsanto was not responsible for the plaintiff's cancer. Despite this setback, plaintiffs have won 3 out of 5 Roundup trials in Philadelphia with an average verdict of roughly $194 million.

September 4, 2024: A Missouri appeals court agreed with a lower court's decision in the case of Moore v. Monsanto, which went in the defense’s favor.

August 23, 2024: Bayer scored a significant win in the 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals. In a ruling issued last week, the court found that federal pesticide labeling regulations preempt state law. This means that EPA-approved pesticide labels, which do not include a cancer warning for Roundup, override state requirements for labeling.

The ruling stems from a Pennsylvania case that alleged Monsanto/Bayer violated state law by failing to include a cancer warning on the Roundup label. But the 3rd Circuit ruled that federal law for pesticide regulations requires nationwide uniformity.

This decision conflicts with another Appeals Court decision from earlier this year, which found federal law did not preempt state law. Reuters reports that the conflict could lead to the Supreme Court weighing in.

August 16, 2024: 4,311 Roundup lawsuit cases are still open in the MDL.

In other Roundup news, the plaintiff in an Oregon case won a critical appeal last month and will get a new trial. The appellant court reversed a judgment that excluded one of the plaintiff’s experts, Dr. Charles Benbrook, from testifying at trial about EPA pesticide regulations. Specifically, Dr. Benbrook was expected to testify about how EPA and IARC reached differing conclusions about the carcinogenicity of glyphosate.

According to the appellant court order, “[w]e conclude that the trial court erred in excluding certain testimony of Dr. Benbrook and that that error was not harmless.”

July 22, 2024: Bayer is lobbying Congress to protect the company from Roundup cancer lawsuits. The new 2024 farm bill, approved by the House Agriculture Committee, contains wording that would shield Bayer from future litigation and limit states from adding pesticide warning labels. Some call this bill a "get out of jail free" card for Bayer, which has lost several court cases this year. According to a report from the Washington Post, Bayer provided input in drafting the proposed legislation.

July 5, 2024: The plaintiff in a Roundup trial scheduled to begin next week in Philadelphia has voluntarily dismissed the case. The case was filed by a plaintiff whose father died of cancer allegedly caused by Roundup exposure. The trial judge dismissed all but one count alleged in the case, finding that the plaintiff had missed the statute of limitations. With only one viable count, the plaintiff voluntarily dismissed the case but may appeal.

June 5, 2024: A Pennsylvania judge reduced the jury verdict from a Roundup trial earlier this year to $400 million. In January, a jury found that Roundup weed killer caused plaintiff John McKivison’s non-Hodgkins lymphoma and awarded him $250 million in compensatory damages and $2 billion in punitive damages. However, Judge Susan Schulman reduced the compensatory damages to $50 million and punitive damages to $350 million. Bayer says it will continue to appeal the case.

June 3, 2024: Only a handful of cases were added to the Roundup MDL since last month, bringing the total cases to 4,285.

April 8, 2024: The Missouri judge overseeing a Roundup case that culminated in a $1.56 billion jury verdict has reduced the verdict to $611 million. The reduced damages award is for three plaintiffs who alleged exposure to Roundup weed killer caused their cancer.

In November of 2023, a jury in Cole County, Missouri, found Bayer's Monsanto unit liable for negligence and design defects, as well as failing to warn about Roundup's risks. The three plaintiffs, Valorie Gunther, Jimmy Draeger, and Daniel Anderson were awarded $61.1 million in compensatory damages and $1.5 billion in punitive damages, which were to be split equally among them. However, Judge Daniel Green decided to reduce the punitive damages to nine times the amount of compensatory damages ($549.9 million), resulting in a total verdict of $611 million.

Bayer, which sought to toss the verdict, said it will appeal Judge Green’s ruling.

April 2, 2024: Since the start of 2024, there have been over 100 cases added to the Roundup MDL, bringing the case total to 4,281. Bayer estimates that there remain roughly 54,000 pending Roundup cancer claims in various courts throughout the country.

January 26, 2024: A jury in Philadelphia returned a $2.25 billion verdict today in favor of a Pennsylvania man who developed non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma after using Roundup multiple times a year over several years. The verdict, which includes $2 billion in punitive damages and $250 million in compensatory damages, is the latest blow to Bayer, which has lost multiple jury trials over the last several months.

December 29, 2023: Last week, Bayer won at trial in a Roundup lawsuit brought by a California man who alleged he developed cancer after exposure to Roundup weed killer. The defense verdict ended a losing streak for Bayer (formerly Monsanto). Five previous Roundup trials had gone in favor of plaintiffs.

December 6, 2023: Bayer will pay approximately $3.5 million to a Pennsylvania woman after a Philadelphia jury concluded Roundup weedkiller caused her cancer. The trial, which lasted roughly three weeks, culminated in a verdict that included $462,500 in compensatory damages and $3 million in punitive damages. This is the fifth consecutive court loss for Bayer.

November 20, 2023: A Missouri jury delivered a verdict worth $1.5 billion in favor of the plaintiffs in a Roundup trial. This is the second-largest jury verdict in the Roundup litigation (our firm earned a $2.055 billion verdict in 2019). Plaintiffs Dan Anderson, James Draeger, and Valorie Gunther will receive a total of $61.1 million in damages and $500 million each in punitive damages. The plaintiffs allegedly developed NHL after using Roundup.

October 31, 2023: Another significant Roundup verdict. The jury in the case of Dennis v. Monsanto Co.returned a verdict worth over $330 million, including punitive damages. The trial took place in San Diego, California.

October 27, 2023: The jury in the case of Caranci v. Monsanto Co. delivered a $175 million verdict in favor of the plaintiff, which includes punitive damages. The case, filed on behalf of an 82-year-old man who alleged Roundup caused his NHL, was tried in Philadelphia.

October 20, 2023: A St. Louis jury returned a verdict in favor of a 67-year-old plaintiff. The jury found that Monsanto/Bayer failed to sufficiently warn about the potential risks associated with Roundup which the plaintiff alleged caused his non-Hodgkin lymphoma.

June 15, 2023: New York Attorney General Letitia James announced that Monsanto/Bayer will pay a settlement worth nearly $7 million to the state to resolve allegations concerning misleading advertising about the safety of glyphosate weed killers like Roundup.

May 24, 2023: The case of Gordon v. Monsanto Co. culminated in a jury verdict for Bayer/Monsanto. This is the seventh straight win for the defense.

December 14, 2022: The case of Langford v. Monsanto Co. et al. (CGC-21-592238), ended in a confidential settlement before trial. Another case that was supposed to proceed to trial in Hawaii (Pied v. MonsantoCo.) has also been settled.

November 14, 2022: Bayer/Monsanto won another trial, the sixth win in a row. This case, Moore v. Monsanto Co., was tried in St. Louis County Circuit Court.

More trials are upcoming in the next few months.

September 2, 2022: A jury in St. Louis returned a verdict in Bayer’s favor in another Roundup trial. This is the fifth consecutive victory for Monsanto/Bayer.

July 4, 2022: The Ninth Circuit panel unanimously told the EPA to reconsider its conclusion that glyphosate, the active ingredient in Roundup weedkiller, is not an “unreasonable risk to man or the environment.” The court agreed with environmental and food safety advocates that the agency did not fully consider whether Roundup causes cancer. Per the decision, “most studies EPA examined indicated that human exposure to glyphosate is associated with an at least somewhat increased risk of developing NHL,” which contradicts EPA’s conclusion that glyphosate is “not likely to cause cancer.”

June 27, 2022: The Supreme Court denied Bayer’s petition for a writ of certiorari in Pilliod et al. v. Monsanto Co. The Pilliods will retain the $87 million reduced verdict.

June 21, 2022: The Supreme Court denied Bayer’s petition for a writ of certiorari in the case of Hardeman v. Monsanto Co., allowing the final judgment of $25.2 million to remain intact.

June 11, 2022: The jury in Shelton v. Monsanto Co. returned a verdict for the defense.

June 2, 2022: Former Monsanto CEO Hugh Grant gave testimony during the trial of Shelton v. Monsanto Co. Grant said Monsanto did not conduct their own tests to evaluate whether there was a connection between Roundup and non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma.

December 13, 2021: Bayer won another Roundup trial. The case of Stephens v. Monsanto Co., which was conducted over Zoom, culminated in a jury verdict for the defense. Per the verdict, the plaintiff’s use of Roundup was not the cause of her cancer.

November 18, 2021: Bayer won its first trial in California regarding Roundup. The case alleged a child's rare form of non-Hodgkin's lymphoma was caused by his mother's use of the herbicide in her garden. The jury determined that the child's exposure to Roundup was not a significant factor in his cancer. (2023 Update: Bayer reached a confidential Roundup settlement with the plaintiff in this case).

May 14, 2021: The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco denied Bayer’s appeal in Hardeman v. Monsanto Co.

Learn More About the Glyphosate Cancer Link in Our Roundup Videos

According to Monsanto executive, Stephen Adams, “[w]ith regards to the carcinogenicity of our formulations we don’t have such testing on them directly…”

Dr. Mark Martens, a Monsanto scientist, noted in 2001, “I don’t know for sure how suppliers would react – but if somebody came to me and said they wanted to test Roundup I know how I would react – with serious concern.”

In 1999, Monsanto hired Dr. James M. Parry, a professor at the University of Wales, to conduct an internal (and secret) safety review of glyphosate and the formulated product. Monsanto decided to do this, in part, because a 1998 study found that glyphosate produces oxidative stress and genotoxicity (a destructive effect on genetic material) in animals.

Dr. Parry recommended that Monsanto conduct studies on the Roundup formulated product (glyphosate plus surfactant) because there was “[n]o adequate in vitro clastogenicity data available for glyphosate formulations.” A clastogen is an agent that can induce genetic mutation by disrupting or damaging chromosomes. Cells become cancer cells largely because of mutations in their genes.

In his review, Dr. Parry concluded that glyphosate is capable of producing genotoxicity both in vivo and in vitro by a mechanism based upon the production of oxidative damage. Oxidative damage to DNA can lead to cancer.

After reviewing the data, Dr. Parry asked Monsanto to conduct studies to see if there was a synergistic effect with regard to glyphosate and the surfactant, to actually see if the Roundup product people use was genotoxic to humans.

In this email, Monsanto executive William Heydens states: “We simply aren’t going to do the studies Parry suggests.” Roughly 20 years later, Monsanto still has not performed the studies Dr. Parry asked for. This was one of the most important issues for the jury in the Johnson case –Monsanto has never tested the carcinogenicity of the Roundup formulated product, and never turned over Dr. Parry’s report to the EPA or shared the report with anybody.

Get Started

Call (310) 207-3233 or fill out the form below and request a free consultation.

20,000+ Families Represented

"Wisner Baum gave exceptional attention to all aspects of the case, detailed inquiry, and tenacious overview of all the information submitted. The paralegals are efficient and diligent. I was completely surprised to find an empathic personal message to take care of my own health during the challenging time of being a full-time caretaker.*"

Mary Flores

Reviewed
on Google

Roundup Lawsuit FAQs

What is Roundup?

Roundup is a non-selective herbicide used to kill weeds that compete with agricultural crops. Glyphosate, the active ingredient in Roundup, works by inhibiting a specific enzyme required for plant growth.

By 2001, Roundup weed killer was the most-used active ingredient in American agriculture, with an estimated 85-90 million pounds used each year. In 2007, that number reached 185 million pounds annually and today, Roundup remains the most widely used herbicide in the United States and worldwide.

Does Roundup Cause Cancer?

Yes, and Monsanto has known about the link between Roundup and cancer for decades.

In 2015, the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), the cancer research arm of the World Health Organization, classified glyphosate as a “probable human carcinogen.” Glyphosate is the active ingredient in Monsanto’s Roundup.

IARC, widely considered the gold standard in the field of cancer research, analyzed all published, peer-reviewed data to come to this conclusion. Per the report, the cancer most associated with glyphosate exposure is non-Hodgkin lymphoma.

The link between Roundup and cancer is not just about glyphosate. Roundup is made up of other ingredients that are toxic in and of themselves, and they also work synergistically to increase the toxicity of glyphosate. Monsanto has known this for many years but still refuses to study the link between cancer and the formulated Roundup product people actually use.

How Does Glyphosate Herbicide Cause Cancer?

Various studies have shown that exposure to glyphosate can cause DNA damage and DNA strand breaks, which is an important precursor to cancer. Indeed, the IARC specifically assessed the genotoxicity of Roundup (the property of chemical agents that damages the genetic information within a cell causing mutations, which may lead to cancer) and concluded that “[t]here is strong evidence that glyphosate causes genotoxicity.”

Additionally, the glyphosate herbicide studies have shown that glyphosate exposure can induce oxidative stress, which is thought to be involved in the development of numerous conditions, including cancer, autism and Parkinson’s disease. When the IARC evaluated whether glyphosate was associated with oxidative stress, the agency concluded that “strong evidence exists that glyphosate . . . can induce oxidative stress.” This could be an important mechanism by which Roundup causes cancer.

In addition to DNA damage and oxidative stress, some scientists have suggested Roundup’s association with various serious health conditions is linked to the effect that Roundup has on the digestive system. Specifically, some scientists believe the same mechanism that makes Roundup toxic to weeds also makes it toxic to the microbes within the human gut. When humans are exposed to Roundup, it leads to a chronic inflammatory state in the gut, as well an impaired gut barrier, which can lead to many long-term health effects, including an increased risk of cancer.

How Do I Know If I Got Cancer from Roundup?

According to a 2008 study on the link between herbicides and cancer, exposure of 10 or more days use in a year to Roundup can potentially double a person’s risk of developing non-Hodgkin lymphoma. Likewise, according to a 2001 study, use of Roundup more than 10 hours over more than 2 days in a year can double the risk of NHL. Therefore, even people who used Roundup around their home may have been exposed enough for Roundup to play a significant role in their cancer.

Is Roundup a Carcinogen?

The International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), one of the foremost cancer research authorities in the world, classified glyphosate, the active ingredient in Roundup, as a “probable human carcinogen.”

IARC Monograph 112 further concluded that the cancer most associated with glyphosate exposure is non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL). Additionally, IARC found strong evidence that glyphosate and commercial formulations can be genotoxic and produce oxidative damage.

According to the California Environmental Protection Agency’s Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA), glyphosate is a chemical known to the state of California to cause cancer and should be labeled as such under the terms of Proposition 65.

What Are the Side Effects of Roundup?

In addition to non-Hodgkin lymphoma, exposure to Roundup weed killer has been linked to the following:

ADHD
Alzheimer’s
Anencephaly
Autism
Birth Defects
Brain Cancer
Breast Cancer
Celiac Disease
Chronic Kidney Disease
Colitis
Depression
Diabetes
Gluten Intolerance
Heart Disease
Hypothyroidism
Infertility
Inflammatory Bowel Disease
Liver disease
Lou Gehrig’s Disease (ALS)
Miscarriage
Multiple Sclerosis
Obesity
Parkinson’s Disease
Reproductive Issues
Respiratory Illness

Are Glyphosate and Roundup the Same Thing?

No.

Glyphosate is the active ingredient in Roundup. The Roundup formulated product sold to consumers is glyphosate plus other ingredients like surfactants, which increase the absorption of glyphosate on the leaves of plants and in human skin. Monsanto is well aware of this fact, as evidenced by a company report from 2001:

“Surfactants are able to increase glyphosate absorption through the skin by (1) removal of lipids (sebum) from the epidermal surface due to surfactant action, (2) increase of the hydration state of the skin (under closed exposure conditions), (3) increase of skin contact (spreading of water droplets by surfactant action), (4) increase of contact time with the skin due to decrease of evaporation of water from the droplets containing surfactant (surfactant monolayer at surface of droplets slows down passage to vapour phase, (5) increase of sub epidermal blood flow due to irritant action of surfactant, (6) intra-epidermal and sub epidermal intercellular water accumulation due to the irritant action of the surfactant.”

The Roundup formulated product you use has not been studied as much as glyphosate. In fact, internal Monsanto emails we obtained in the discovery phase of litigation show that Monsanto has not conducted any carcinogenicity studies on the Roundup formulated product.

In one email exchange, Monsanto executive Richard Garnett noted that studying the Roundup formulation “was not likely to help us.” Another Monsanto executive noted in the same email chain that after abandoning this kind of scientific inquiry, “[w]e are left behind with too many questions…”

“…the formulated product (and thus the surfactant) does the damage.” – Dr. William Heydens, Monsanto Executive

Is Roundup More Toxic Than Glyphosate?

Yes. According to a U.S. National Toxicology Program (NTP) spokesperson, Roundup “is much more toxic” than glyphosate in isolation.

This question is arguably more important than the toxicity of glyphosate because the formulated Roundup product is what people, animals and the environment are actually exposed to. Industry testing underlying the regulatory authorizations for Roundup have always been conducted on glyphosate by itself, even though the Roundup product contains other ingredients called surfactants and adjuvants.

According to various studies, other ingredients in Roundup may increase the toxicity of glyphosate by enabling the chemical to become more bioavailable and penetrate plant and animal cells with greater ease than glyphosate alone.

Monsanto is acutely aware of this. According to internal company documents from 2003, a top company scientist said:

“You cannot say that Roundup is not a carcinogen … we have not done the necessary testing on the formulation to make that statement.” – Donna Farmer, Monsanto

In May of 2018, the National Toxicology Program (NTP) issued a preliminary report on its evaluation of glyphosate formulations. According to Mike DeVito, acting chief of the NTP Laboratory, “[w]e see the formulations are much more toxic. The formulations were killing the cells.”

How Much Glyphosate Is in Roundup?

The following list details the percentage of glyphosate in specific Roundup products:

Roundup QuikPRO is 73.3% glyphosate
Roundup Custom is 53.8% glyphosate
Roundup PRO Concentrate is 50.2% glyphosate
Roundup Weed & Grass Killer Super Concentrate is 50.2% glyphosate
Roundup ProMAX is 48.7% glyphosate
Roundup Original is 41% glyphosate
Roundup Max Control 365 Concentrate is 18% glyphosate
Roundup Poison Ivy Concentrate Plus is 18% glyphosate
Roundup Weed & Grass Killer Concentrate Plus is 18% glyphosate
Roundup Extended Control Concentrate is 18% glyphosate
Roundup Ready-to-Use Weed & Grass Killer is 2% glyphosate
Roundup Precision Gel is 1% glyphosate
Roundup Extended Control is 1% glyphosate
Roundup Ready-to-Use Poison Ivy is 1% glyphosate

What Products Contain Glyphosate?

Monsanto:

Aquamaster®
Bronco®
Campaign®
Expedite®
Fallow Master®
Honcho®
Landmaster®
Pondmaster®
Protocol®
Ranger®
Roundup®
RT 3®

Dow AgroSciences:

Accord®
Durango®
Duramax®
Glyphomax®
Glypro®
Rodeo®

DuPont:

Abundit Extra®

Cenex / Land O’Lakes:

Silhouette®

Helena:

Rattler®
Hoss Ultra®
Showdown®

Loveland:

Mirage®
KleenUp®
Makaze®
Mad Dog®

Riverside/Terra:

Jury®

Syngenta:

Touchdown®

What Does EPA Say About Glyphosate?

In 1985, the eight members of U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) toxicology branch signed a consensus review classifying glyphosate as a possible carcinogen based on studies that showed tumor growth among rodents treated with glyphosate. According to the EPA scientists who reviewed the studies, glyphosate appeared to cause testicular tumors in male rats, thyroid tumors in female rats and a rare form of kidney tumor in mice.

The mice finding was what led EPA to classify glyphosate as a “possible” carcinogen. At the time of this classification, Roundup had already been on the market for over a decade.

However, documents obtained via Freedom of Information Act requests by Carey Gillam from U.S. Right to Know (USRTK) show that a Monsanto manager responded to the EPA’s glyphosate classification by arranging for the kidney tumor slides to be reexamined by an academic pathologist — a man who could “persuade the agency that the observed tumors are not related to glyphosate.”

The pathologist did exactly that and found a tumor among the control mice that nobody else (including the EPA scientists) could find, which effectively called into question the scientific conclusions gleaned from the tumors among the mice treated with glyphosate.

Monsanto argued that in lieu of the single observed control group tumor, it should be given another opportunity to test glyphosate. But when the agency asked Monsanto to repeat the rodent study (it was, in fact, Monsanto’s study to begin with), Monsanto declined. (A “control group” is the group in an experiment or clinical trial that does not receive the same treatment as the experiment group(s).)

In the end, Monsanto’s stonewalling and influence allowed glyphosate to be downgraded from a Group C carcinogen (“possibly” carcinogenic to humans) in 1985 to a Group D carcinogen (“not classifiable as to human carcinogenicity”) in 1986. The EPA reviewed the data on glyphosate again in 1991 and downgraded the chemical yet again to Group E (“evidence of noncarcinogenicity in humans”).

Not all of the EPA scientists on the 1991 panel agreed with the conclusion. In fact, two of the scientists would not even sign the paper that classified glyphosate to Group E.

After six years of pressure from Monsanto to change the EPA’s glyphosate classification from possible carcinogen to no evidence of carcinogenicity, the agency has stuck with the Group E classification ever since.

Which Glyphosate Assessment Is More Reliable: EPA or IARC?

IARC is widely considered the worldwide gold standard in the field of cancer research. As an independent agency, its sole mission is human health.

Seventeen world-renowned scholars came to a unanimous determination on glyphosate in IARC’s 2015 Monograph. Dr. Aaron Blair, who only recently retired from the U.S. National Cancer Institute after a career spanning decades, led the IARC Working Group in drafting the glyphosate Monograph.

IARC’s glyphosate Monograph is up-to-date. After reviewing all relevant and available research, the Working Group considered a broad range of evidence, including human epidemiology and other peer-reviewed studies.

The EPA’s last assessment of glyphosate was conducted in 1993, though the agency is expected to release a new report on glyphosate sometime in 2019. In its 1993 assessment, the EPA relied almost entirely on industry-funded studies and did not analyze epidemiological data.

While the EPA is also charged with protecting human health, the agency’s ties to Monsanto have become a cause for concern. A trove of documents that are now a part of The Monsanto Papers show that EPA officials may have colluded with Monsanto to quash another U.S. agency’s review of glyphosate. According to the documents, Monsanto was worried about the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR) becoming “a domestic IARC…” with its review of glyphosate.

“I think it’s very clear… that EPA officials and Monsanto employees worked together to accomplish a goal of stopping that analysis at ATSDR. That is collusion. I don’t know what else you’d call that,” says Wisner Baum attorney R. Brent Wisner.

Who Can File a Roundup Lawsuit Against Monsanto?

Our firm represents a wide range of individuals who were diagnosed with non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) after using Roundup. Most of our clients are individuals who sprayed Roundup around their home or business. We also represent government workers, farmers, agricultural workers, gardeners, landscapers and others.

Why Are People Suing Monsanto Over Roundup?

For years, Monsanto has claimed (and continues to claim) that Roundup is safe. However, numerous studies have found statistically significant links between Roundup and a host of serious health issues, including cancer. Even Monsanto’s own studies on Roundup and its active ingredient, glyphosate, have shown that Roundup is not as safe as Monsanto claims.

In 2015, the World Health Organization’s International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), one of the foremost cancer research authorities in the world, classified the active ingredient in Roundup (glyphosate) as a probable human carcinogen. The IARC report further concluded that the cancer most associated with exposure to glyphosate is non-Hodgkin lymphoma.

The Roundup cancer litigation seeks to hold Monsanto accountable for failing to warn the public about the link between Roundup exposure and cancer. Monsanto has known for decades about the link between Roundup and cancer, but has continued to market its product as safe, putting profit over human safety.

Have There Been Any Monsanto Settlements or Verdicts?

There have been three Roundup cancer trials against Monsanto, all of them successful for the plaintiffs. Our law firm served on all three trial teams for these cases.

Johnson v. Monsanto – $289M verdict on 8/10/2018
Hardeman v. Monsanto – $80M verdict on 3/27/2019
Pilliod et al., v. Monsanto – $2.055 billion verdict on 5/13/2019

Monsanto (now Bayer) announced a settlement on June 24, 2020. Our law firm issued the following statement:

Wisner Baum Statement regarding Roundup Litigation Settlement: Wisner Baum is pleased with the settlement. It is a big first step in correcting the forty years of harm caused by glyphosate. Non-Hodgkin lymphoma is devastating. Over the last four years, as we have pressed this litigation forward despite innumerable obstacles, we have had tremendous success in a few important cases. But, those successes have been tempered with the fact that many of our clients continue to suffer from the consequences of cancer. This settlement is for everyone and should help our clients rebuild and move forward in a meaningful way. Actual settlement amounts are yet to be determined, and each of our clients will be made an individual offer based on the facts of their case. For now, however, this is an important and historic day in the fight to protect consumers from harmful pesticides. And, while the story of glyphosate is not over-- there are likely many fights surrounding cancer, food safety, and GMOs to be had-- this chapter of the glyphosate litigation is over.

Will the Verdicts Help Ban Roundup in California?

Only a governmental entity can ban a chemical. The purpose of the Johnson case and others like it is to hold Monsanto accountable for failing to warn that Roundup can cause cancer and to compensate individuals for the damages (cancer) caused by Roundup use.

California’s EPA, known as The Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA), added glyphosate, the active ingredient in Monsanto’s Roundup weed killer, to the state’s Proposition 65 list of chemicals known to cause cancer on July 2, 2017. Within about a year of OEHHA’s decision, a warning label would normally be added to the Roundup label, however Monsanto sued OEHHA to stop this from happening. In June 2020 the judge overseeing the case decided in favor of Monsanto and said that it would violate the company’s right to free speech if they were required to include a cancer warning on its Roundup products.

While an outright ban is not likely in the short term, some communities in California have banned glyphosate (Roundup). To see a comprehensive list of many cities, states and countries restricting and banning Roundup, view our Where is Glyphosate Banned page.

What Are the Monsanto Papers?

The Monsanto Papers are a collection of internal Monsanto documents unearthed during the discovery phase of the federal Monsanto Roundup litigation. The documents consist of internal Monsanto emails, text messages, reports, reviews, studies, and other memoranda.

A judge overseeing the federal Monsanto Roundup litigation declassified the first batch of documents and published them on the website of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California on March 14 and 15, 2017. Wisner Baum released the second batch of Monsanto secret documents on August 1, 2017. We have released more and more declassified documents since that time with December 2, 2019 being our most recent batch.

The Monsanto Papers tell an alarming story of ghostwriting, scientific manipulation, collusion with the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and previously undisclosed information about how the human body absorbs glyphosate. These documents provide a deeper understanding of the serious public health consequences associated with Monsanto’s conduct in marketing Roundup.

Some key revelations in the Monsanto Papers:

Monsanto hardly tested the toxicity of the Roundup formulated product.
Monsanto actively avoided conducting studies on glyphosate and the Roundup formulation that might cast doubt as to the safety of its products.
Monsanto ghostwrote studies that were supposed to be conducted by independent scientists.
Monsanto implemented a PR strategy to attack scientists who called into question the safety of its products.

As a Farmer, I Depend on Roundup and Use It Regularly. Are Lawyers Trying to Get Rid of Roundup?

The Roundup cancer litigation is not about getting rid of Roundup; it is about Monsanto’s failure to warn people that exposure to Roundup can lead to cancer, something Monsanto has known for decades.

Monsanto should warn consumers about the cancer link so that people have the opportunity to know what they are consuming and at what cost. Instead, Monsanto continues to tout Roundup as safe and attacks scientists or anyone else who says anything to the contrary. Meanwhile, many men, women, and children exposed to Roundup are getting sick.

In essence, this litigation is about Monsanto being held to account for depriving consumers of information needed to make an educated decision on whether or not to purchase and use a product that can cause harm. Monsanto has robbed them of this choice.

If Monsanto had put a warning label on Roundup when it first learned of the cancer link, there would not be any litigation to speak of.

Monsanto continues to keep consumers in the dark about the dangers surrounding Roundup. Our firm will continue to fight for and on behalf of consumers to bring those dangers to light and hold Monsanto accountable for failing to warn.

What is the Monsanto Roundup Class Action Lawsuit?

On June 20, 2017, six individuals from Wisconsin, Illinois, California, New York, New Jersey, and Florida filed a class action lawsuit against Monsanto alleging the company falsely promoted Roundup as interfering with an enzyme found only in plants, but not “in people or pets.”

According to the complaint, Monsanto’s marketing claim that Roundup is safe—because it targets an enzyme that is not found in people or pets—is “false, misleading, and deceptive, as the enzyme that glyphosate targets is found in people and pets—specifically, in beneficial gut bacteria.”

Glyphosate kills weeds by interfering with the “shikimate pathway,” a metabolic sequence that synthesizes vital amino acids. Glyphosate disrupts the shikimate pathway by interfering with 5-enolpyruvylshikimate-3-phosphate (EPSP), an enzyme that governs aromatic amino acid formation.

Beneficial bacteria in the human gut (and the guts of other mammals) produces and utilizes EPSP synthase. Our immune systems depend on this beneficial gut bacteria.

Plaintiffs in the case are seeking compensation for themselves and class members equal to the amount they paid for Roundup products, which they would never have purchased had they been adequately informed that glyphosate targets an enzyme that exists in both humans and animals, contrary to Roundup’s marketing.

What Amount of Money Can I Expect from a Roundup Cancer Lawsuit?

On Aug. 10, 2018, a San Francisco, California jury awarded $289.2 million to Dewayne “Lee” Johnson in the first Roundup cancer lawsuit to proceed to trial. The jury verdict included $39.2 million for compensatory damages and $250 million in punitive damages.

Claims for damages and future verdicts and settlements in each Roundup lawsuit will vary in accordance with each individual situation and the rules of the court where a particular case is filed. These are some of the most common damages pursued by claimants:

Medical Expenses
Lost Wages or Income
Reduced Earning Capacity
Personal Injury
Pain and Suffering
Wrongful Death (if a loved one passed away from NHL)

What is Glyphosate Weed Killer?

Glyphosate (or N-phosphonomethyl-glycine) is one of the world’s most widely used broad-spectrum herbicides, accounting for roughly 25 percent of the world herbicide market. Glyphosate herbicide is widely utilized in agriculture because it is a cost-effective, easy to use compound that kills weeds, especially annual broadleaf weeds and grasses competing with crops. While it is true that glyphosate products are mostly used in agriculture, some countries also use glyphosate herbicide to control unwanted weed growth in forestry, gardening and in non-cultivated places, like industrial areas and along highways.

How are People Exposed to Glyphosate?

Glyphosate herbicide exposure is most common among farm workers and those living near farmland. Exposure to glyphosate herbicide can happen in a number of ways, including:

Contact with skin
Contact with eyes
Inhaling during usage
Swallowing (if you have not properly washed your hands after usage)

What is the Roundup Lawsuit About?

Roundup (glyphosate) is a Monsanto herbicide used by farmers, gardeners, maintenance workers, agricultural workers, and many others as an all-purpose weed killer. Since Roundup first entered the market in the 1970s, Monsanto has denied claims that Roundup causes cancer, insisting that Roundup is safe. A Monsanto advertisement once noted that Roundup is “safer than table salt.”

But according to internal Monsanto emails now known throughout the world as The Monsanto Papers, Monsanto has known for several decades that Roundup (glyphosate) causes cancer. Rather than informing consumers about the glyphosate cancer risk, Monsanto buried the risks as sales of Roundup continued to skyrocket.

In March of 2015, IARC surveyed the published research on Roundup cancer links and concluded the blockbuster herbicide is “probably carcinogenic to humans.” The cancer agency further concluded that the cancer most associated with exposure to glyphosate is non-Hodgkin lymphoma.

Outraged by Monsanto’s deception, more than 100,000 people have made the decision to file a Roundup lawsuit alleging exposure to Roundup causes cancer.
Our firm represents thousands of people who are pursuing justice against Monsanto (now Bayer) because they do not want what happened to them or a member of their family to happen to anyone else. They want consumers to have the choice— to know the health consequences associated with using a product. If they would have known that Roundup was a carcinogen, they never would have used the product.

Does Roundup Cause Non-Hodgkin Lymphoma?

Yes. According to numerous studies, exposure to Roundup increases the risk of developing non-Hodgkin lymphoma. Below are some of the studies demonstrating the link between Roundup exposure and NHL:

How Does Glyphosate Cause Cancer?

Studies show that exposure to Roundup and its active ingredient, glyphosate, can cause DNA damage and DNA strand breaks, an important precursor to cancer. IARC specifically assessed the genotoxicity of Roundup (the property of chemical agents that damages the genetic information within a cell causing mutations, which may lead to cancer) and concluded that “[t]here is strong evidence that glyphosate causes genotoxicity.”

Roundup exposure can also induce oxidative stress, which is thought to be involved in the development of numerous conditions, including cancer, autism, and Parkinson’s disease. In addition to DNA damage and oxidative stress, some scientists have suggested Roundup exposure can lead to a chronic inflammatory state in the gut, as well an impaired gut barrier, which can increase the risk of cancer.

If I File a Roundup Lawsuit, Am I Joining a Monsanto Class Action?

No, the individual Roundup lawsuits over the link to non-Hodgkin lymphoma are not part of a Monsanto class action. The individual Roundup cancer lawsuits seek remedy for injuries (non-Hodgkin lymphoma) sustained as a result of being exposed to Roundup and its active ingredient, glyphosate.

Roundup class actions against Monsanto are related to allegations of false and misleading information on the Roundup label and don’t involve personal injury or wrongful death claims. According to the class actions, Monsanto continues to mislead consumers by representing glyphosate, the active ingredient in Roundup, as targeting an enzyme that is “found in plants but not in people or pets.”

The Monsanto class actions (filed in multiple states) allege that the enzyme glyphosate targets exist in people and pets. Per the class actions:

“Glyphosate functions as a biocide by inhibiting the enzyme 5-enolpyruvylshikimate-3-phosphate (“EPSP”) synthase, disrupting the fifth of six enzymatic steps in the shikimate pathway, which processes aromatic amino acids in certain organisms. Although humans and other mammals themselves do not have a shikimate pathway, the shikimate pathway is present in bacteria, including beneficial bacteria that inhabit the mammalian gut and are essential to overall health. EPSP is therefore “found in . . . people [and] pets. Just like it inhibits EPSP synthase in weeds, the active ingredient in Roundup inhibits EPSP synthase in these human and pet gut bacteria, and just like it targets weeds, the active ingredient in Roundup targets the human and pet gut bacteria.”

What is the Difference Between an Individual Roundup Lawsuit and the Roundup Class Action?

Individual lawsuits against Monsanto seek remedy for personal injuries (non-Hodgkin lymphoma) sustained as a result of exposure to Roundup. Farmers, farm workers, horticulturalists, landscapers, gardeners, government employees, and a host of other people have filed individual lawsuits against Monsanto based on allegations that Monsanto knew about the link between exposure to Roundup and non-Hodgkin lymphoma, but failed to warn consumers.

The Monsanto Roundup class action, on the other hand, involves consumers who say they would never have purchased Roundup products had they known that glyphosate targets an enzyme that exists in the human body and the bodies of certain mammals, contrary to Monsanto’s marketing.

Anyone who purchased certain Roundup products and is not participating in a personal injury or wrongful death lawsuit can participate in the Monsanto class action over the misbranding of Roundup. Claimants are not required to prove that they suffered personal injuries as a result of using the product, only that they purchased the product.

“Wisner Baum are not only amazing attorneys, but more importantly they are activists. They are about changing the systems which got us into trouble in the first place. They understand their role in the process of making change. Attorneys have the fortunate ability to go into the company files during the investigative process. They see the companies’ behaviors and work hard at getting confidential documents declassified that have true public health benefit(s).” — Kim Witczak.

Is Glyphosate Harmful to Your Gut or Metabolism?

Yes, glyphosate targets an enzyme present in beneficial gut bacteria, potentially disrupting gut health and metabolic processes, including glucose metabolism.

What Health Issues are Linked to Roundup Besides Cancer?

Studies associate glyphosate with ADHD, Alzheimer's, autism, birth defects, celiac disease, colitis, heart disease, inflammatory bowel disease, kidney disease, and liver disease.

What Does Glyphosate do to Your Body Long-Term?

Long-term glyphosate exposure is linked to cancer risk and a range of chronic health issues, including metabolic disorders, liver and kidney disease, nervous system damage, and gut microbiome disruption.