Ag News

Monsanto, plaintiffs agree to $7.25b settlement in roundup case

On Feb. 17, Monsanto announced its proposed U.S. nationwide class settlement designed to resolve current and future Roundup claims alleging Non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) injuries through a long-term claims program. According to Monsanto, leading plaintiff law firms representing the class filed a motion today seeking preliminary approval of the settlement in the Circuit Court of the City of St. Louis, Missouri. The agreement is pending approval from the court.

To fund the class settlement, Monsanto will make declining capped annual payments for up to 21 years totaling up to $7.25 billion, following court approval. Monsanto benefits from damage control for future NHL/Roundup cases. In the motion, the plantiffs said the settlement “delivers meaningful compensation to thousands of individuals who face both significant litigation risk and no prospect of timely recovery on their claims.”

The agreement, if approved, could provide Missouri courts with significant docket relief; the plaintiffs noted that there are tens of thousands of cases pending in Missouri alone.

As a part of the agreement, Monsanto makes no admission of liability or wrongdoing. The company maintains its stance that glyphosate-based herbicides – critical tools that farmers rely on to produce affordable food and feed the world – can be used safely and are not carcinogenic. The company cited conclusions of leading regulators worldwide, including the U.S. EPA and EU regulatory bodies.

The two sides negotiated for 18 months before reaching the settlement, according to the plaintiffs’ motion requesting that the court approve the settlement.

Monsanto has also reached agreements to settle certain other Roundup (glyphosate) cases on confidential terms. Additionally, earlier this year Monsanto settled eight remaining polychlorinated biphenyls (PCB) verdicts related to the Sky Valley Education Center (SVEC) in the state of Washington on confidential terms. Monsanto also previously resolved PCB environmental cases with the U.S. states of Illinois and West Virginia.

The Supreme Court is considering a separate case over Roundup labeling. This case, Durnell v. Monsanto, centers on whether state laws governing “failure to warn” claims are preempted by federal pesticide law, specifically the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA). Failure to warn claims assert that the company’s product label does not provide adequate notice that the product is known to cause harm. The court is scheduled to hear oral arguments on April 27.

---

• Categories:

• Tags:

---