Bayer Challenges 'Novel Theory' Behind Jury's $265M Dicamba Verdict
Bayer also called the jury's $250 million in punitive damages excessive, unconstitutional and "the result of passion and prejudice," with statements comparing Monsanto "with violent criminals" and disclosing the company's net worth.
March 30, 2020 at 08:24 PM
4 minute read
Bayer AG has asked a federal judge to toss last month's $265 million verdict, insisting that the jury found no evidence that Monsanto Co.'s dicamba herbicide caused economic damages to a peach farmer's orchard.
In a motion for judgment or new trial filed on Friday, Bayer said the jury relied on a "novel theory of liability" under Missouri law in finding Monsanto liable. In a separate motion, Bayer called the jury's $250 million in punitive damages excessive, unconstitutional and "the result of passion and prejudice," with statements comparing Monsanto "with violent criminals" and disclosing the company's net worth.
"This astronomical award far exceeds anything that could be justified based on the conduct at issue at the level of compensatory damages," wrote Liz Blackwell, a partner at Bryan Cave Leighton Paisner in St. Louis. "The fact that the jury awarded $50 million more than requested further reflects that plaintiff's counsel successfully stoked the passions of the jury."
In an emailed statement about the post-trial motions, Monsanto said, "Helping farmers safely and successfully grow healthy crops is what we do, and of course we have deep empathy for any farmer who experiences crop losses. In this case, we believe that the jury's verdict is inconsistent with the evidence and the law, and that the Court should set aside the verdict or at least order a new trial."
Don Downing, a partner at Gray, Ritter & Graham in St. Louis who is lead counsel in the dicamba MDL, did not return a call for comment.
About 100 farmers have sued Monsanto over dicamba herbicide. The case that went to trial involved Bader Farms and stands apart from dozens of other lawsuits pending in multidistrict litigation before U.S. District Judge Stephen Limbaugh of the Eastern District of Missouri, primarily because it was the first one filed and featured a peach orchard, not a soybean field.
A consolidated complaint alleges Bayer and BASF, which both released their dicamba herbicides in 2017, created an "ecological disaster."
In a key finding, the judge ruled in the Bader Farms case, later expanding his decision to all the lawsuits, that plaintiffs could sue Monsanto for crop damages caused in 2015 and 2016, even though its dicamba was not yet on the market. At that time, farmers could plant Monsanto's genetically modified seeds, which were resistant to dicamba. Limbaugh found that Monsanto should have foreseen farmers would spray BASF's older dicamba herbicide, which was unapproved for spraying over crops and prone to drift into neighboring fields.
Bayer, in its post-trial motion, said the jury could not hold Monsanto responsible for the actions of third parties using another company's product. Monsanto had warned consumers not to use older dicamba products on its seed.
"Missouri law does not permit liability based on an expectation that consumers will violate the law and misuse your product—let alone someone else's product," Blackwell wrote.
Bayer also raised federal preemption defenses and instructional errors, and challenged the lost profits that Bader Farms claimed. Bayer insisted that the plaintiff had failed to prove that Monsanto had conspired with BASF.
BASF, another defendant in the trial, represented by John Mandler, a partner at Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath in Minneapolis, raised similar arguments in its post-trial motions, as well as moved to strike all punitive damages against it.
"First, we point out that throughout the trial, Missouri law and well-established legal precedent were not followed," BASF said in a statement. "Second, we seek to reverse the court's finding that BASF is jointly liable for punitive damages solely assigned to Monsanto by the jury. BASF and Monsanto are separate legal entities and competitors, and BASF should not be punished for Monsanto's conduct."
In separate litigation, Bayer also is appealing nearly $2.4 billion in verdicts tied to Monsanto's Roundup. About 42,700 lawsuits allege that that herbicide caused non-Hodgkin lymphoma.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllJohn Deere Annual Meeting Offers Peek Into DEI Strife That Looms for Companies Nationwide
7 minute read'Close Our Borders?' Senate Judiciary Committee Examines Economics, Legal Predicate for Mass Deportation Proposal
3 minute read'Serious Misconduct' From Monsanto Lawyer Prompts Mistrial in Chicago Roundup Case
3 minute readFrozen-Potato Producers Face Profiteering Allegations in Surge of Antitrust Class Actions
3 minute readLaw Firms Mentioned
Trending Stories
- 1SurePoint Acquires Legal Practice Management Company ZenCase
- 2Day Pitney Announces Partner Elevations
- 3The New Rules of AI: Part 2—Designing and Implementing Governance Programs
- 4Plaintiffs Attorneys Awarded $113K on $1 Judgment in Noise Ordinance Dispute
- 5As Litigation Finance Industry Matures, Links With Insurance Tighten
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250