In a filing in a state court in St. Louis that was made public on Wednesday, the firms said the accord should not be fast-tracked for possible preliminary approval on March 4, just 15 days after the proposed settlement was announced.

The request is the first major organized pushback against Bayer’s attempt to resolve most of the 65,000 remaining Roundup claims in state and federal courts.

In a statement, a company spokesperson said Bayer remained confident that the proposed settlement was “fair to all claimants, and warrants approval by the court.”

“We fully expect a robust debate about the class settlement and are not surprised by either the support or opposition from plaintiff firms over recent days,” the spokesperson said.

A nationwide settlement

Plaintiffs say that Roundup’s active ingredient, glyphosate, causes cancer, and they developed non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma and other forms of the disease after using the weedkiller at home or on the job.

Bayer acquired Roundup as part of its purchase of agrochemical company Monsanto in 2018. It has said decades of studies have shown Roundup and glyphosate are safe and do not cause cancer.

The German company announced on February 17 that it had negotiated with a group of plaintiffs’ attorneys to strike a nationwide settlement resolving nearly all the Roundup lawsuits it is facing by creating a new class action covering claims across the country.

The settlement would establish a program to pay claimants over 21 years, allowing not only people with existing claims to participate but those who were exposed to the pesticide before the deal was struck and diagnosed with cancer in the future.

In the filing on Wednesday, the law firms asking for the delay said they first received the more than 600-page settlement package the day it was announced, and cannot effectively analyze it quickly. In contrast, they said Bayer and the firms it negotiated with spent two years putting the deal together.

Bayer said the settlement would achieve “legal certainty” by ending years of costly litigation over Roundup while compensating current and future cancer claimants.

Company expects majority to participate

The deal, which requires a judge’s approval, does not require Bayer to admit liability or wrongdoing, and the company can back out if too many plaintiffs decline to participate.

Bayer Chief Executive Bill Anderson said on a call with investors last week that the company requires the “vast majority” of the plaintiffs to participate, and he expects that will happen.

The law firms behind Wednesday’s filing said a judge’s initial approval of the settlement would trigger a broad stay of all Roundup litigation, including cases stretching back nearly a decade, and unfairly prejudice sick plaintiffs who have waited long enough to go to trial.

They also questioned whether the settlement treats plaintiffs fairly. They asked for a delay of the approval hearing by at least 60 days to review the terms.

A group of plaintiffs’ attorneys who negotiated the deal with Bayer said in a statement on Wednesday that they hope the court will not delay the preliminary approval hearing.

The lawyers seeking to delay the settlement “are hopefully working as hard to communicate its terms to their clients as they are trying to delay compensation for the tens of thousands of Roundup victims who have waited a decade for justice,” they said in the statement.

Some lawyers representing Roundup plaintiffs who were not part of the settlement negotiations have also expressed support for the deal.

St. Louis City Circuit Court Judge Timothy Boyer, who is overseeing the class action, has not yet scheduled a hearing in the case.

The post Bayer’s proposed Roundup settlement faces first signs of pushback in court appeared first on Grainews.

The German company said the proposed nationwide settlement, expected to be filed on Tuesday in state court in St. Louis, Missouri, would establish a long-term claims program funded by capped annual payments over up to 21 years.

The company, which acquired Roundup as part of its purchase of agrochemical company Monsanto in 2018, is facing claims over Roundup from approximately 65,000 plaintiffs in U.S. state and federal courts.

The plaintiffs say they developed non-Hodgkin lymphoma and other forms of cancer due to using the weedkiller, either at home or on the job.

Proposed settlement aimed at heading off future lawsuits

The proposed settlement covers the bulk of the lawsuits, but will need a judge’s approval.

It is also designed to head off future lawsuits, and includes a provision that allows people who can prove they have been diagnosed with non-Hodgkin lymphoma and were exposed to Roundup prior to Tuesday to file claims to receive a portion of the settlement for up to 21 years.

Bayer CEO Bill Anderson said on a call with investors and reporters that he is confident the proposed class action settlement will resolve the vast majority of the claims, although he declined to say how many people currently support the deal.

The company said it had separately reached confidential settlements to resolve other Roundup cases with specific law firms, although the company would not name the firms or specify the amount of those deals.

Company paid out US$10 billion to settle previous suits

Roundup is among the most widely used weedkillers in the United States. Bayer has said decades of studies have shown Roundup and its active ingredient, glyphosate, are safe for human use.

The company had previously paid about $10 billion (C$13.6 billion) to settle most of the Roundup lawsuits that were pending as of 2020, but failed to get a settlement then covering future cases.

It has had a mixed record with cases that have gone to trial. It prevailed in a series of Roundup trials, but has been hit with large jury awards in the past few years, including a $2.1 billion (C$2.86 billion) verdict in a case in the U.S. state of Georgia in March.

The verdicts shattered both investor confidence and company hopes that the worst of the Roundup litigation was over, and put pressure on Bayer to find a comprehensive solution to the lawsuits.

Supreme Court to hear appeal

Tuesday’s proposed settlement comes after the U.S. Supreme Court agreed to hear an appeal in a case that Bayer argues will sharply limit its liability in the litigation.

The company said the Supreme Court case, scheduled for oral arguments at the end of April, remains essential to resolving the Roundup litigation.

A favorable ruling would wipe out several large verdicts that remain on appeal and would also prevent future claims from individuals who choose to opt out of the nationwide settlement.

Bayer expects its provisions and litigation liabilities to rise from 7.8 billion euros (C$12.6 billion) to 11.8 billion euros. It anticipates around 5 billion euros in litigation-related payouts in 2026, and now expects negative free cash flow for the year.

The company has postponed publication of its 2025 results and 2026 guidance to March 4 to reflect the agreements.

— Reporting by Diana Novak Jones and Kirsti Knolle; Additional reporting by Dietrich Knauth

The post Bayer proposes $7.25 billion plan to settle U.S. Roundup cancer suits appeared first on Grainews.

The justices took up Bayer’s appeal of a lower court’s ruling in a case brought by a man who said he was diagnosed with non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma after years of exposure to Roundup. The Missouri Court of Appeals upheld a $1.25 million (C$1.74 million) verdict that a St. Louis jury awarded the plaintiff, John Durnell, over his cancer diagnosis.

Bayer shares jumped almost five per cent on the news that the court would hear the case. The court has yet to announce when it will hear arguments in the dispute.

In a statement, Bayer CEO Bill Anderson said the court’s decision was “an important step in our multi-pronged strategy to significantly contain this litigation.”

“It is time for the U.S. legal system to establish that companies should not be punished under state laws for complying with federal warning label requirements,” Anderson said.

An attorney for the plaintiff did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Trump administration urged Supreme Court to take appeal

The Missouri Court of Appeals rejected the German pharmaceutical and biotechnology company’s contention that federal law governing pesticides bars lawsuits making claims over pesticides under state laws.

Bayer is facing similar claims from approximately 65,000 plaintiffs in U.S. state and federal courts. Roundup is among the most widely used weedkillers in the United States.

President Donald Trump’s administration in December urged the Supreme Court to take up Bayer’s appeal. In a brief filed at the court, U.S. Solicitor General D. John Sauer offered the administration’s view that Bayer is correct in its reading of the law at issue.

Bayer is arguing that consumers should not be able to sue it under state law for failing to warn that Roundup increases cancer risk because the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has found no such risk and requires no such warning. Bayer argued that federal law does not allow it to add any warning to the product beyond the EPA-approved label.

The company has made the U.S. Supreme Court a key part of its strategy to manage the claims, as a ruling that federal law preempts claims brought under state law would shut down the vast majority of the lawsuits.

Lawyers for Durnell had asked the Supreme Court to turn away Bayer’s appeal. They said Durnell relied on Bayer’s advertising and not just the label when he chose to use Roundup, and the company’s marketing failed to warn consumers of the product’s risks.

Lawsuits continue to pour in

The company has paid about $10 billion (C$13.9 billion) to settle most of the Roundup lawsuits that were pending as of 2020, but failed to get a settlement covering future cases. New lawsuits have continued to pour in since then. Plaintiffs have said they developed non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma and other forms of cancer due to using Roundup, either at home or on the job.

Bayer, which acquired Roundup as part of its $63 billion (C$87.7 billion) purchase of agrochemical company Monsanto in 2018, has said that decades of studies have shown Roundup and its active ingredient, glyphosate, are safe for human use.

“EPA has repeatedly determined that glyphosate is not likely to be carcinogenic in humans, and the agency has repeatedly approved Roundup labels that did not contain cancer warnings,” Sauer said in the administration’s brief to the Supreme Court.

The company has had a mixed record at trial in the Roundup lawsuits. Bayer has prevailed in a series of Roundup trials, but it was also hit with large jury awards in the past few years, including a $2.1 billion verdict in a case in the U.S. state of Georgia in 2025.

Bayer has asked the Supreme Court to consider the Roundup litigation before, but was rebuffed in 2022. Since then, one federal appeals court agreed with the company in a split from other appeals courts.

Bayer has threatened to withdraw Roundup from the U.S. market as it fights the litigation. The company replaced glyphosate in U.S. consumer products with different weed-killing substances.

— Additional reporting by Andrew Chung

The post U.S. Supreme Court to hear Bayer’s bid to curb Roundup cases appeared first on Grainews.

In a brief filed at the court, U.S. Solicitor General D. John Sauer bolstered Bayer’s effort to limit the lawsuits and potentially avert billions of dollars in damages, saying the company was correct that the federal law governing pesticides preempts lawsuits that make claims over the products under state law.

WHY IT MATTERS: Bayer has told U.S. officials it could exit the Roundup business unless legal protection is strengthened.

The shares had surged 14.9 per cent to €35 (C$56.80) early Tuesday morning.

“We see the Solicitor General’s recommendation as an important step towards containing glyphosate litigation,” JPMorgan analysts said in a note, adding the Supreme Court was likely to rule next year.

The analysts flagged there could be a reduction in provisions for glyphosate litigation, which Bayer has said were $7.6 billion (C$10.6 billion) at the end of September.

Bayer has asked the justices to hear its appeal of a lower court’s decision to uphold a $1.25 million verdict awarded by a St. Louis jury in a Missouri state court case in which a plaintiff named John Durnell sued after being diagnosed with non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma he attributed to his exposure to Roundup. Bayer is facing more than 67,000 such lawsuits in U.S. state and federal courts.

The German pharmaceutical and biotechnology company, which acquired Roundup as part of its $63 billion purchase of Monsanto in 2018, has said that decades of studies have shown Roundup and its active ingredient, glyphosate, are safe for human use.

Label fight

Sauer told the justices that upholding the lower court’s decision would allow juries to second guess the science-based judgments of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.

“EPA has repeatedly determined that glyphosate is not likely to be carcinogenic in humans, and the agency has repeatedly approved Roundup labels that did not contain cancer warnings,” Sauer said in the brief.

“Where, as here, EPA has specified the health warnings that should appear on a particular pesticide’s label, a manufacturer should not be left subject” to state labelling regimes each prescribing different requirements, Sauer said.

The brief comes as the Trump administration — which has aimed to address concerns from agricultural groups about potential restrictions on agrochemicals — must also contend with supporters of the “Make America Healthy Again” movement, who have highlighted possible health risks associated with pesticides.

Bayer’s effort has drawn support from pro-business groups like the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, which said that allowing Bayer to face the liability opens up many corporations that follow federal law to litigation.

Lawyers for Durnell asked the Supreme Court to turn away Bayer’s appeal. They said the plaintiff relied on Bayer’s advertising and not just the label when he chose to use Roundup, and the company’s marketing failed to warn consumers of the product’s risks.

The U.S. Supreme Court asked the Trump administration in June for its views in the case.

Mixed record

Roundup is among the most widely used weedkillers in the United States.

The company has paid about $10 billion to settle most of the Roundup lawsuits that were pending as of 2020, but failed to get a settlement covering future cases. New lawsuits have continued to pour in since then. Plaintiffs have said they developed non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma and other forms of cancer due to using Roundup, either at home or on the job.

The company has had a mixed record at trial in the Roundup lawsuits. Bayer has prevailed in a series of Roundup trials, but it was also hit with large jury awards in the past few years, including a $2.1 billion verdict in a case in the U.S. state of Georgia in March.

Bayer settled the Georgia case and three others that had been on appeal in November.

Bayer has threatened to withdraw Roundup from the U.S. market as it fights the litigation. The company replaced glyphosate in U.S. consumer products with different weedkilling substances.

— Additional reporting by Andrew Chung

The post Trump administration backs Bayer’s bid to curb Roundup lawsuits appeared first on Grainews.

Why it matters: Glyphosate-based herbicides like Roundup are key crop protection products for Canadian farmers.

Bayer has asked the justices to hear its appeal of a lower court’s decision to uphold a $1.25 million (C$1.71 million) verdict awarded by a St. Louis jury in a case in Missouri state court in which a plaintiff named John Durnell sued after being diagnosed with non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma he attributed to his exposure to Roundup.

The Supreme Court asked the Justice Department for its views on whether the justices should take up the appeal.

Bayer facing more than 67,000 lawsuits

The Missouri Court of Appeals rejected the German pharmaceutical and biotechnology company’s contention that federal law governing pesticides bars lawsuits like Durnell’s making claims under state laws. Bayer is facing more than 67,000 such lawsuits in U.S. state and federal courts. Other federal and state appellate courts have made similar rulings.

Roundup is among the most widely used herbicides in the United States.

Bayer is arguing that consumers should not be able to sue it under state law for failing to warn that Roundup increases cancer risk because the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has found no such risk and requires no such warning. Bayer argued that federal law does not allow it to add any warning to the product beyond the EPA-approved label.

The company appealed the verdict in Durnell’s case to the Missouri Court of Appeals.

Lawyers for Durnell asked the Supreme Court to turn away Bayer’s appeal. They said the plaintiff relied on Bayer’s advertising and not just the label when he chose to use Roundup, and the company’s marketing failed to warn consumers of the product’s risks.

Bayer may withdraw Roundup

The company has paid about $10 billion to settle most of the Roundup lawsuits that were pending as of 2020, but failed to get a settlement covering future cases. New lawsuits have continued to pour in since then. Plaintiffs have said they developed non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma and other forms of cancer due to using Roundup, either at home or on the job.

Bayer, which acquired Roundup as part of its $63 billion purchase of agrochemical company Monsanto in 2018, has said that decades of studies have shown Roundup and its active ingredient, glyphosate, are safe for human use.

The company has had a mixed record at trial in the Roundup lawsuits. Bayer has prevailed in a series of Roundup trials, but it was also hit with large jury awards in the past few years, including a $2.1 billion verdict in a case in the U.S. state of Georgia in March.

Bayer has asked the Supreme Court to consider the Roundup litigation before, but was rebuffed in 2022. Since then, one federal appeals court agreed with the company in a split from other appeals courts.

Bayer has threatened to withdraw Roundup from the U.S. market as it fights the litigation. The company replaced glyphosate in U.S. consumer products with different weedkilling substances.

The post US Supreme Court seeks Justice Department views on Bayer Roundup appeal appeared first on Grainews.

The decision from the Missouri Court of Appeals’ Western District on Tuesday rejected Bayer unit Monsanto’s argument that the lower court impermissibly allowed testimony at the 2023 trial about a ruling from the San Francisco-based 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in a separate case about the cancer risks of glyphosate, the pesticide in Roundup.

Why it matters: Bayer has said it may pull Roundup from the North American market if the U.S. doesn’t increase protections against product liability litigation.

Bayer is wrong in arguing that judicial opinions are categorically inadmissible at a jury trial, the court said. The court upheld the $611 million (C$845.2 million) in compensatory and punitive damages awarded to Daniel Anderson, Jimmy Draeger and Valorie Gunther after their lawsuits were consolidated and tried before a jury.

Bayer has faced thousands of lawsuits over whether Roundup causes cancer since it bought Monsanto for $63 billion in 2018. It agreed to settle much of that litigation for $10.9 billion in 2020, but failed to resolve future cases. About 67,000 remain, in both federal and state court.

Though Bayer has prevailed in many of the Roundup trials, plaintiffs have won more than $4 billion of verdicts. Bayer has been pursuing appeals to reduce the verdict amounts while petitioning the U.S. Supreme Court to resolve a broader swath of the cases.

One of Bayer’s defenses in the litigation has been that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has determined that glyphosate doesn’t pose a risk to human health.

To counter that argument, the plaintiffs in Tuesday’s case had told the jury that the 9th Circuit in 2022 found the EPA’s determination that glyphosate was not likely to cause cancer was not supported by the evidence and directed the agency to reexamine it.

In a statement, a representative for Monsanto said the company will be seeking further review of the decision to allow the opinion to be presented to jurors.

“In the majority of other cases which went to trial in Missouri, judges properly excluded inadmissible evidence, leading to positive outcomes for the Company,” the statement said.

An attorney for the plaintiffs did not respond to requests for comment.

The plaintiffs filed their lawsuits in 2022, claiming they each had been diagnosed with non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma after years of using Roundup to control weeds.

A Cole County, Missouri, jury found Monsanto liable for negligence, selling a defective product and failing to warn about Roundup’s risks. They awarded $61.1 million of compensatory damages and $1.5 billion of punitive damages.

In March 2024, the trial judge had let the $61.1 million component stand, but reduced punitive damages to nine times that amount, or $549.9 million. The U.S. Supreme Court has said that punitive damages should generally not be more than nine times compensatory damages.

In Tuesday’s decision, the appellate court also rejected another of the company’s key arguments, that federal law blocks any state law claim that the company failed to warn consumers about the risks. The court agreed with another Missouri appellate district that found Monsanto had not shown an irreconcilable conflict between the federal and state laws.

Thousands of other Roundup cases are pending in Missouri. Another trial over Roundup is underway in St. Louis. It is expected to last through mid-June.

The post Bayer loses appeal of $611M Roundup verdict in Missouri appeared first on Grainews.