Federal Jury Finds Roundup Was 'Substantial Factor' in California Man's Cancer
Tuesday's verdict is a significant blow to Monsanto parent company Bayer AG, which last year was hit with a $289 million verdict in San Francisco Superior Court in a Roundup case outside the MDL proceedings.
March 19, 2019 at 05:18 PM
4 minute read
A federal jury in San Francisco has found that Monsanto's Roundup was a “substantial factor” in causing a Northern California man's cancer.
The unanimous ruling Tuesday from the six-member jury means that jurors will now move on to hear a second phase of Edwin Hardeman's case against Monsanto, the first bellwether case to go to trial in multidistrict litigation claiming Roundup causes non-Hodgkin lymphoma in humans. In the trial's second phase, jurors will consider evidence about what the company knew about the herbicide's carcinogenic properties, its interactions with regulators and potential damages.
U.S. District Judge Vince Chhabria of the Northern District of California, who is overseeing multidistrict claims the popular weed killer can cause non-Hodgkin lymphoma, or NHL, bifurcated trial to first consider the question of whether the scientific evidence supported claims that Hardeman's Roundup use was a significant factor in him contracting NHL.
Monsanto's lawyers at Wilkinson Walsh + Eskovitz had contended that Hardeman had other significant risk factors for NHL, including his age, weigh, and a long-term Hepatitis infection. The jury, however, answered “yes” to the only question on their verdict form for phase one of the trial: “Did Mr. Hardeman prove by a preponderance of the evidence that his exposure to Roundup was a substantial factor in causing his non-Hodgkin's lymphoma?”
|
➤➤ Get class action news and commentary straight to your inbox with Critical Mass from Law.com. Learn more and sign up here.
Jennifer Moore of the Moore Law Group, who is co-lead counsel for Hardeman alongside Aimee Wagstaff of Andrus Wagstaff, said Tuesday afternoon leaving the courtroom that the verdict “was a long time coming for Mr. Hardeman” and that he and his legal team were looking forward to putting their case in phase two of the trial.
The verdict is a significant blow to Monsanto parent company Bayer AG, which last year was hit with a $289 million verdict in San Francisco Superior Court in a Roundup case outside the MDL proceedings. Although the state court judge overseeing that case slashed the award by more than $200 million post-trial, the company had been hoping to set a different tone in the MDL cases with a defense verdict in phase one of the first case to go to trial.
Dan Childs, a spokesman for Bayer in the U.S., said in a prepared statement that the company was “disappointed” in the phase one verdict but continues to believe that Roundup and other herbicides with the active ingredient glyphosate don't cause cancer. “We are confident the evidence in phase two will show that Monsanto's conduct has been appropriate and the company should not be liable for Mr. Hardeman's cancer,” Childs said. Childs said that the phase one verdict in Hardeman's case will have “no impact on future cases and trials because each one has its own factual and legal circumstances.”
“We have great sympathy for Mr. Hardeman and his family, but an extensive body of science supports the conclusion that Roundup was not the cause of his cancer,” Child said. “Bayer stands behind these products and will vigorously defend them.”
On Tuesday afternoon, Chhabria, as he has throughout the proceedings, urged jurors to avoid news coverage of the case, but added “now more than ever.”
“Keep your head down. Keep your ears closed,” he said to jurors before they left for the day.
Phase two of the trial is scheduled to begin Wednesday morning.
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
© 2024 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 AllA Judge Asks: Is It Time to End Ken Feinberg's Roundup Settlement Program?
7 minute readWhy the Wide Range of Roundup Verdicts? It Might Depend on What Juries Hear About the EPA
8 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Elon Musk Names Microsoft, Calif. AG to Amended OpenAI Suit
- 2Trump’s Plan to Purge Democracy
- 3Baltimore City Govt., After Winning Opioid Jury Trial, Preparing to Demand an Additional $11B for Abatement Costs
- 4X Joins Legal Attack on California's New Deepfakes Law
- 5Monsanto Wins Latest Philadelphia Roundup Trial
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
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