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
© 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 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
- 1'A Death Sentence for TikTok'?: Litigators and Experts Weigh Impact of Potential Ban on Creators and Data Privacy
- 2Bribery Case Against Former Lt. Gov. Brian Benjamin Is Dropped
- 3‘Extremely Disturbing’: AI Firms Face Class Action by ‘Taskers’ Exposed to Traumatic Content
- 4State Appeals Court Revives BraunHagey Lawsuit Alleging $4.2M Unlawful Wire to China
- 5Invoking Trump, AG Bonta Reminds Lawyers of Duties to Noncitizens in Plea Dealing
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