What a Strong Month for Bayer Means for Future Roundup Lawsuits
Editors carefully fact-check all Consumer Notice, LLC content for accuracy and quality.
Consumer Notice, LLC has a stringent fact-checking process. It starts with our strict sourcing guidelines.
We only gather information from credible sources. This includes peer-reviewed medical journals, reputable media outlets, government reports, court records and interviews with qualified experts.
It has been a tough month for plaintiffs as Bayer continues to combat ongoing Roundup litigation with mounting success.
The company, which has spent years grappling with lawsuits that tie its popular weed killer to cancer, earned several trial wins over the last few weeks. Its most recent win was on Sep. 12 when a Philadelphia jury determined that Roundup did not cause plaintiff Ryan Young’s non-Hodgkin lymphoma.
According to the Philadelphia Inquirer, the jury determined that while Roundup was defective and did not include proper warnings, it was still not responsible for Young’s cancer.
Bayer achieved this victory less than two weeks after another win from 2022 was upheld by an appeals court. The ruling was based, in part, on the determination that the original court was right to exclude the plaintiff’s expert from the trial.
In what is likely the most critical decision of all, the Third U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Philadelphia also created a circuit split by overturning a plaintiff win and siding with Bayer on the key issue of federal preemption.
Bayer says that it has now seen 14 favorable outcomes in its last 20 Roundup trials, despite plaintiffs still earning some major wins over the last year.
How Bayer’s Wins Impact Future Roundup Litigation
While Bayer has had a strong few weeks, not all of its recent wins are likely to significantly impact future litigation.
The appeals court decision centered on an expert’s testimony was largely a one-off issue given that the expert in question was a clinical oncologist who could not necessarily speak on causation between Roundup’s active ingredient glyphosate and cancer.
The most recent decision by the Philadelphia jury was also surprising, as past trials in Philadelphia court had resulted in hundreds of millions of dollars awarded to plaintiffs.
But still, the circuit split from mid-August has the potential to significantly impact upcoming lawsuits.
That case had centered on whether the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) preempts state regulations regarding product labeling requirements. The Ninth Circuit and Eleventh Circuit courts had previously ruled that FIFRA does not preempt state laws, and found Roundup to be at fault for failing to include cancer warnings on their labels. However, the newest ruling contradicts those decisions.
Lawsuits claiming that Bayer and Monsanto violated state regulations by not warning of cancer concerns on Roundup products may now have more difficulty succeeding, particularly since Bayer plans to heavily lean on the Third Circuit’s ruling in upcoming trials.
“The Company is actively taking steps to apply the Schaffner ruling to other Roundup cases and looks forward to presenting its arguments, as fully embraced by the Third Circuit, at trial courts, appellate courts, and the U.S. Supreme Court,” the company said in a statement following its most recent trial victory.
A new Roundup trial began in the Philadelphia Common Pleas Court last Monday, providing plaintiffs with a renewed chance to reverse Bayer’s recent run of success.
Editor Lindsay Donaldson contributed to this article.