Plaintiff Claims Monsanto 'Influenced and Manipulated' Science as Roundup Bellwether Shifts to Liability
Monsanto's lawyer argued in openings for the liability and damages phase of the trial that plaintiffs were cherry-picking Monsanto's statements and that no regulator had found that Roundup caused cancer during the time plaintiff Edwin Hardeman was using the weedkiller.
March 20, 2019 at 02:51 PM
3 minute read
A lawyer for a man who developed cancer after decades of using Monsanto's Roundup said Wednesday that the company “influenced and manipulated” science surrounding the weedkiller and its active ingredient, through its relationships with regulatory officials and by ghost-writing scientific studies.
Aimee Wagstaff of Wagstaff Andrus focused on Monsanto's ghost-writing efforts and “cozy relationship” with some EPA officials during opening arguments on behalf of Edwin Hardeman, a Northern California man who developed non-Hodgkin lymphoma. Wagstaff's remarks came on the first day of the damages and liability phase of the first bellwether case to go to trial in the massive Roundup multidistrict litigation. A San Francisco jury on Tuesday found that Hardeman had proven that Roundup more likely than not was a substantial factor in his cancer.
Judge Vince Chhabria of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, who is overseeing the federal Roundup litigation, split the trial to first consider whether scientific evidence supported the plaintiff's allegations that Roundup causes cancer. Chhabria told jurors Monday morning that they will now consider whether Monsanto is liable for Hardeman's injury, and, if so, what damages the company owes him.
Wagstaff reminded jurors that evidence showed that Hardeman had used 6,000 gallons of Roundup to fend off weeds and poison oak on his Northern California property before his 2015 cancer diagnosis.
“We're here today now in phase two to talk about Mr. Hardeman and the fact that Mr. Hardeman got cancer from Monsanto's product,” Wagstaff said.
The parties have stipulated that about $200,000 in economic damages are at stake in phase two for Hardeman's medical bills, but plaintiffs are also seeking punitive damages. Wagstaff told jurors Wednesday that they could take into account that Monsanto sold to Bayer AG for $63 billion last year and had a net worth of $7.8 billion and $2.4 billion in cash on hand at the time of the sale.
Monsanto's lead lawyer, Brian Stekloff of Wilkinson Walsh + Eskovitz, said that plaintiffs were trying to take “cherry-picked” evidence, including internal company emails, to make their case.
“We heard pieces of evidence, pieces of stories to try to convince you that Monsanto hid the truth or denied the truth or did something wrong,” Stekloff said. Stekloff said that no health organization or regulator had said that Roundup or its active ingredient glyphosate caused cancer during the time that Hardeman was using the product.
“No one said that, based on all the science,” he said.
But late in his opening argument for phase two, Stekloff gave an indication of the uphill fight his client is facing at this point in the proceedings.
“This is not a popularity contest,” he said. “In the end, we're not going to ask, 'Do you like Monsanto?'”
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 All'Close Our Borders?' Senate Judiciary Committee Examines Economics, Legal Predicate for Mass Deportation Proposal
3 minute readA Judge Asks: Is It Time to End Ken Feinberg's Roundup Settlement Program?
7 minute readTrending Stories
- 1T14 Sees Black, Hispanic Law Student Representation Decline Following End of Affirmative Action
- 2$25M Grubhub Settlement Sheds Light on How Other Gig Economy Firms Can Avoid Regulatory Trouble
- 3Supreme Court Takes Up TikTok's Challenge to Upcoming Ban or Sale
- 4State High Court Bucks Trend Favoring Insurers, Sides With Restaurants Seeking COVID-19 Coverage
- 5Remote Proceedings: A Gift for the Holidays
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