Monsanto Roundup Lawsuit: Everything You Need to Know About Cancer Claims

Monsanto and the Roundup lawsuit represent one of the largest and most-publicized consumer product lawsuits in history. Thousands are bringing thousands of claims on behalf of themselves, farmers, landscapers, and others, alleging that exposure to the active ingredient of Roundup, glyphosate, resulted in their development of non-Hodgkin lymphoma and other health problems. 

On this page, you will find updates and clear information on the Roundup lawsuit, including the nature of the case, how it started, major moments in the timeline, and answers to frequent questions about claims and settlements that are still pending.

What the Monsanto Roundup Lawsuit Is About?

The Monsanto Roundup lawsuit alleges that the herbicide Roundup, manufactured by Monsanto and currently owned by Bayer, contains glyphosate, which the International Agency for Research on Cancer describes as “probably carcinogenic to humans.” Thousands of farmers, gardeners, and farm workers have claimed that exposure to Roundup for long periods constitutes a causal factor in their having developed non-Hodgkin lymphoma or related cancers.

These lawsuits allege that Monsanto knew or should have known about these health risks and nevertheless failed to issue appropriate warnings or change the formulation of the product. The plaintiffs also charge the company with negligence, defectively designing the product, and failing to warn consumers about the possible dangers.

Currently, the Roundup litigation is among the largest mass tort litigations in the United States, with tens of thousands of claims filed in state and federal courts. The settlement of these cases will continue to affect how companies are liable for such damages and how the public interprets safety in chemical agriculture products.

Timeline of Key Events For the Monsanto Roundup Lawsuit

The Monsanto Roundup lawsuit has proven to be one of the highly covered legal battles in America, involving farmers, landscapers, and ordinary people who had depended on a weed killer for decades. What started as independent claims of injury turned into a nationwide fight against the corporation concerning accountability and consumer safety. Thousands of people have stepped forward to say that their long exposure to Roundup’s active ingredient (glyphosate) has resulted in serious health problems, including cancer.

Here you’ll find a clear recitation of how this case started and unfolded year-on-year, and an explanation for why this case continues to perpetuate conversations on product safety and corporate culpability.

September 17, 2025 – Ninth Circuit Weighs Expert Testimony Dispute in Roundup MDL Appeal

The arguments in oral form were presented before a panel of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals considering whether a trial court judge exercised wrong discretion by excluding the general-causation expert and awarding a summary judgment to Monsanto in a Roundup injury case. 

This was a ruling by the district court within the Northern District of California in the Roundup multi-district litigation, in which the court ruled that the expert’s methodology, peer-reviewed as it was, was inadequate for meeting the admissibility standards set under Daubert. At the hearing, appellate judges grilled both counsel about the reach and limits of judicial discretion in the exclusion of expert testimony, as well as the threshold for reliable scientific evidence in toxic tort cases. The panel even took note of the chronological procedural history of the Roundup MDL as well as its sprawling evidentiary record.

Thus, a decision is pending even as it stands, for the Roundup MDL still brings in little public and judicial attention compared to the years of litigation at its peak.

September 4, 2025 – Court Grants Plaintiffs Access to Bayer’s Internal Merger Documents in Roundup MDL

The federal judge who is currently handling the Roundup multidistrict litigation (MDL) in California has authorized the plaintiffs to access Bayer’s internal due diligence documents relating to its 2018 merger with Monsanto. The documents were first put to public use in a shareholder lawsuit, claiming that Bayer had misrepresented the litigation risks concerning Roundup to the investors. They will now be available to attorneys representing individuals alleging causation of non-Hodgkin lymphoma by exposure to the herbicide.

This decision could be extremely important regarding widening the evidence base that could be employed in the Roundup litigation and could also shed light on what Bayer and Monsanto knew, or did not know, about the alleged health risk of glyphosate, both before and after the merger. It has to be noted by the court that internal assessments concerning the legal risks and scientific risks of Roundup have relevance in the determination of the knowledge the companies possessed concerning the timing of their disclosure obligations.

Bayer asserts that it produced millions of pages of discovery and insists that further documents submitted will not change the judgment of the prevailing scientific consensus regarding glyphosate safety; however, the recently opened records could present plaintiffs with a considerable amount of evidence in support of failure-to-warn and negligence claims. The practical effects remain to be seen, but it is an important procedural development in discovery.

September 2, 2025 – Bayer Seeks Global Approval for New Herbicide ‘CropKey’ Amid Roundup Fallout

Bayer has applied for regulatory approval for its new herbicide named CropKey in the United States, the EU, Brazil, and Canada. Unlike Roundup, which is based on glyphosate, CropKey’s active ingredient is icafolin-methyl, which Bayer describes as a less risky, next-generation weed control technology. CropKey is presented by Bayer as a strategic pivot intended to move away from the cancer controversies that have marred Roundup’s legacy.

Within tens of thousands of Roundup lawsuits still pending against it, Bayer and Monsanto’s subsidiary have confronted horrendous turbulence, and while state legislative attempts to restrict liability exposure were forged, the verdicts by juries have established that the company remains far from free from legal threats. With every passing day, scientific studies challenge the long-term safety of glyphosate, and Bayer seems intent on taking its gardening products on with the same vigor with which it manages potential litigation exposure.

The company has continued to quietly settle existing cases, finalizing thousands of Roundup claims and, most recently, settling over 200 PCB exposure lawsuits related to the Sky Valley Education Center near Seattle. The financial markets are signaling optimism for Bayer’s settlement momentum, anticipating that the company might eventually be on the threshold of litigation stability.

August 7, 2025 – Bayer Adds $1.37 Billion to Roundup Litigation Reserves

Bayer raised $1.37 billion in its litigation reserves for forthcoming Roundup settlements and verdicts. The company has also arrived at settlements on thousands of other cases, although analysts feel that the amount remains far from adequate to settle all claims. The plaintiff lawyers are now being split between acceptance of the existing settlement terms and clamoring for more trials for higher compensation.

August 4, 2025 – Delaware Emerges as New Hotspot for Roundup Lawsuits

Delaware has suddenly grown into a budding forum for Roundup business. So far, 92 different plaintiffs from across the country have brought claims into the Superior Court of the State of Delaware, alleging in their complaints that exposure to Roundup has caused them non-Hodgkin lymphoma. The movement draws attention to the growing trend of plaintiffs leaning toward state courts, which have proven to be much quicker and far more favorable for product liability cases than the slower federal MDL.

July 22, 2025 – Law Firms Broaden Eligibility for Roundup Cancer Claims

As the law firms now broaden criteria with reference to Roundup cancer claims, they are making years of strict eligibility standards. Previously, it was only those exposed for a longer time whose claims were submitted within time limits that counted. Increasing scientific evidence and continued lawsuits have awakened individuals who had developed non-Hodgkin lymphoma after taking Roundup and are discouraged from submitting an application if they had been turned down before.

July 21, 2025 – Senator Booker Proposes Federal Law to Hold Pesticide Makers Liable

Senator Cory Booker has suggested the Pesticide Injury Accountability Act to counter new state laws in places such as Iowa and Idaho that shield pesticide manufacturers from liability once a product is EPA-approved. The bill aims to amend FIFRA to create a federal right of action for persons impaired by pesticides such as Roundup. It directly counters Monsanto’s long-time game plan of using federal approval as a shield for product liability and failure to warn claims.

June 30, 2025 – Supreme Court Requests DOJ Opinion on Bayer’s Roundup Appeal

The U.S. Supreme Court has asked the Department of Justice to weigh in on a Bayer petition that seeks to limit thousands of Roundup cancer lawsuits. Bayer is appealing a Missouri court decision that upheld a $1.25 million verdict for a plaintiff who developed non-Hodgkin lymphoma after years of using Roundup. Bayer argues that state-law failure-to-warn claims should be preempted by EPA approval of Roundup with no cancer warning. The CEO of Bayer expressed confidence in the appeal, while investors did not share that optimism, with shares declining by 4.5%.

June 24, 2025 – New Jersey Supreme Court Centralizes Roundup Cancer Cases Under MCL

The New Jersey Supreme Court allowed multicounty litigation (MCL) for cancer-related claims against Roundup and centralized all the cases to be heard by Judge Gregg A. Padovano in Bergen County for an organized process. The pressure to consolidate was presented before multiple active cases across the state, showing a likely increase in the number of cases. Monsanta objected on this ground stating that the case unit is too small. Although this is not a landmark procedural transform, it is expected to streamline discovery and put settlement pressure on Bayer, collating state efforts with ongoing national litigation.

June 22, 2025 – U.S. Supreme Court Weighs Taking Up Landmark Roundup Preemption Case

The Supreme Court of the United States is about to determine whether to hear Durnell v. Monsanto, which might set the course for the future of Roundup cancer litigation. The central issue at play is whether state law failure-to-warn claims are preempted by federal pesticide law (FIFRA). Monsanto argues that EPA approval of Roundup labels without a cancer-warning preempts all state lawsuits, while the lower courts remain divided on this issue. The Court must decide by June 26 whether Durnell may proceed sometime during the 2025-2026 term. An eventual ruling will either protect or severely inhibit thousands of presently existing lawsuits, the most consequential point for both sides.

June 17, 2025 – New Study Links Glyphosate to Cancer Even at “Safe” Exposure Levels

A new two-year study by the Ramazzini Institute and U.S. researchers reports that glyphosate exposure has caused many cancers in rats, including leukemia, even at levels considered safe by regulators. The authors contend that tumors, both benign and malignant, can be initiated after prenatal and low-dose exposure. They further found that co-formulants of the herbicide may potentially enhance the carcinogenicity of glyphosate. This provides increasing scientific evidence that has intertwined glyphosate with cancer and other health issues and reinforces the claims central to the Roundup litigation.

June 16, 2025 – Monsanto Settles Texas Roundup Case Ahead of Closing Arguments

Monsanto settled a Roundup cancer case in Texas on the eve of closing arguments in Grantges v. Monsanto in St. Louis County. The settlement averts another possible large award against the company and is seen as a strategic move with increasing litigation pressure across the country.

June 13, 2025 – Florida Court Overturns $75 Million Roundup Punitive Damages Verdict

The Florida Appellate Court overturned the jury verdict awarding 75 million dollars in punitive damages for a Roundup case because the court held that state punitive claims are preempted by federal law since the EPA has determined that glyphosate is “not likely” to be carcinogenic. The ruling significantly curtails the ability of juries to punish Monsanto for wrongdoing, notwithstanding internal documents of the company showing that Monsanto was aware of the possible cancer risks. Legal experts believe that the position of the EPA may change soon, and the ruling raises critical issues regarding the accountability of toxic exposure cases.

June 6, 2025 – Monsanto Toxicologist Admits Gaps in Roundup Cancer Research During Trial

After ten days of trial, the Grantges v. Monsanto cancer trial is continuing in the St. Louis County Circuit Court. It sounds like the plaintiff’s case, or rather, the evidence, contends that long-term exposure to Roundup caused his non-Hodgkin lymphoma. Among the main witnesses this week was Donna Farmer, a Monsanto toxicologist and the company spokesperson on Roundup’s safety. 

In court testimony, Dr. Farmer acknowledged her 2009 internal e-mail, which cautioned that “you cannot say Roundup does not cause cancer,” because for the full Roundup formulation, no carcinogenicity studies had been done. She also confessed to editing the scientific articles without attribution, saying that it is standard practice for Monsanto to contribute to publications issued under an independent researcher’s name.

May 27, 2025 – Missouri Appeals Court Upholds $611 Million Roundup Verdict Against Monsanto

With a Missouri appellate court affirming the judgment of $611 million against Monsanto, it constitutes a major victory for the plaintiffs who claim to have developed non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma after using Roundup. Although the trial judge had reduced the jury’s $1.56 billion award, the appellate ruling retains a large punitive element and holds that Monsanto knowingly marketed a carcinogenic product without adequate warning. The court dismissed Monsanto’s arguments that it was prejudiced by expert testimony about EPA oversight and that damages awarded were excessive, thus further cementing the company’s continuing large financial exposure in Roundup litigation.

May 19, 2025 – Reports Suggest Possible Monsanto Bankruptcy to Consolidate Roundup Claims

A potential filing for Chapter 11 bankruptcy for its subsidiary Monsanto would bring into bankruptcy court all Roundup cancer claims, reports say. The company has paid more than $10 billion to settle lawsuits that alleged Roundup caused non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma, while it now has a market value of some $25.65 billion, less than half of what it paid to acquire Monsanto in 2018. Analysts suggest this can either be a financial necessity or a tactical maneuver to coerce plaintiffs into accepting reduced settlements, akin to techniques practiced in other high-profile incidents of product liability.

May 9, 2025 – Pennsylvania Court Upholds $175 Million Caranci Roundup Verdict

Monsanto lost an appeal against the verdict in favor of 83-year-old Ernest Caranci for non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma allegedly caused by prolonged exposure to Roundup in the $175 million decision in October 2023. The Pennsylvania Superior Court upheld the jury award, which included $150 million in punitive damages, ruling that it was supported by the evidence and the law. This ruling is a significant victory for plaintiffs, whereby Bayer faces mounting legal pressure in the ongoing Roundup litigation.

March 23, 2025 – Georgia Jury Awards $2.1 Billion in Roundup Cancer Case

A jury in Georgia has mandated Bayer to pay 2.1 billion dollars to a plaintiff who developed non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma after years of Roundup use. The award encompasses 65 million dollars in compensatory damages and 2 billion dollars in punitive damages, reinforcing the jury’s strong disapproval of Bayer’s safety handling of glyphosate. Bayer stated it would appeal on grounds that the verdict is contrary to regulatory findings; nevertheless, the growing size of this judgment illustrates intensifying financial and legal risk for the company. Even after settling 10 billion dollars, Bayer is still facing more than 60,000 Roundup lawsuits that are still pending, and these reserves do not appear sufficient to cover current looming claims anymore.

March 19, 2025 – Plaintiffs Seek Centralization of Roundup Lawsuits in New Jersey

Plaintiffs in 36 Roundup-related lawsuits have petitioned the New Jersey Supreme Court to centralize their suits in the Atlantic County Superior Court. They argue that consolidation would provide for uniformity in the treatment of pretrial issues, avoid inconsistent rulings, and advance judicial economy. The active cases in New Jersey currently total 41, and the plaintiffs say that, if centralization is granted, that number could exceed 100. Monsanto continues to oppose the motion, maintaining that the number of cases does not warrant multicounty litigation.

December 8, 2024 – Chicago Judge Declares Mistrial in Roundup Cancer Case Over Misconduct

A Chicago judge declared a mistrial in a Roundup cancer case after Monsanto’s defense team improperly referred to a previous criminal charge against the plaintiff during cross-examination. The court condemned that act as serious misconduct and warned the defense that further transgressions might bring sanctions or contempt. According to the plaintiff’s counsel, the alcohol charge was entirely irrelevant and prejudicial, and even the judge admitted that no amount of curative instruction could remedy the inflicted wound. This casts a renewed light on the necessity of strictly respecting evidentiary standards in the ongoing Roundup trials.

November 20, 2024 – Robert F. Kennedy Jr. Poised to Influence Herbicide Regulation as HHS Pick

Robert F. Kennedy Jr. had been a strong critic of Roundup, and was also part of the legal team representing Dewayne Johnson who was the first plaintiff to win a Roundup case involving cancer in 2018. Johnson, a former school groundskeeper, alleged that prolonged exposure to the herbicide caused his non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma, to which the jury awarded $289 million against Monsanto for acting with maliciousness and disregard for consumer safety. Kennedy has been calling out for rigorous oversight of chemical products and the holding of corporations accountable. If the anticipated appointment occurs as Secretary of Health and Human Services, he would be expected to boost calls for stricter regulations on herbicides, such as glyphosate, thus making a full course effect on federal policy and the broader shape of the Roundup war itself.

October 24, 2024 – Third Circuit Affirms Federal Preemption in Monsanto Warning Case

The Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, in holding that EPA-approved product labels provide immunity to the manufacturer from certain state-level warning requirements, essentially agreed with a Massachusetts trial court ruling finding that federal law preempts a plaintiff’s failure-to-warn claims against the defendant Monsanto, thereby confining the trial to allegations of design defect. This ruling is a setback for the plaintiffs in this case and may thus encourage further similar rulings in other jurisdictions that tend to favor corporate defendants.

October 10, 2024 – Philadelphia Jury Awards $78 Million in Roundup Cancer Verdict

Over 3 million dollars were awarded as compensatory damages and over 75 million dollars in punitive damages to the plaintiffs by a Philadelphia jury in the Melissen case, thereby giving a major victory to the plaintiffs. The decision further shows that juries are willing to hold Monsanto accountable for allegedly failing to adequately advise the users about the potential cancer risk of exposure to Roundup.

September 11, 2024 – Plaintiff Loses Young v. Monsanto, but Philadelphia Plaintiffs Still Hold Strong Record

In Young v. Monsanto, a Philadelphia jury ruled against the plaintiff by proving that he did not sufficiently tie Roundup exposure to his non-Hodgkin lymphoma. Thus, this becomes a huge blow for the plaintiffs. However, on balance, the record in Philadelphia remains strong with plaintiffs winning three of five Roundup lawsuits heard there. These victories consist of jury awards of 404 million, 175 million, and 3.5 million dollars, giving an approximate overall average of about 194 million dollars for the five verdicts.

August 16, 2024 – Major Appellate Victory for Bayer

Bayer secured a significant win in the Third Circuit Court of Appeals, which ruled that federal pesticide labeling laws preempt state-level warning requirements. The decision, originating from a Pennsylvania case, found that once the EPA approves a pesticide label without a cancer warning, states cannot impose additional or conflicting warning obligations.

This ruling deepens the divide among federal appellate courts on preemption, making the possibility of U.S. Supreme Court review more plausible than before.

July 23, 2024: Significant Appellate Victory in Oregon

The plaintiff secured a major appellate win in Oregon, successfully challenging a jury verdict. The appeal centered on the trial court’s decision to exclude expert testimony from Dr. Charles Benbrook concerning EPA regulations.

Dr. Benbrook was prepared to explain the U.S. pesticide regulatory framework, including how the EPA evaluates products under FIFRA, assesses cancer risks, and sets labeling requirements. His testimony would have compared the EPA’s position on glyphosate’s carcinogenicity with that of the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC).

The Oregon appellate court found that excluding Dr. Benbrook’s testimony was an error, reversed the lower court’s ruling, and ordered a new trial. Monsanto’s cross-appeal, which argued that FIFRA preempted the plaintiff’s claims, was rejected, consistent with other courts’ rulings that neither express nor implied preemption applies.

June 5, 2024: Roundup Verdict Reduced to $400 Million

A judge in the Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas reduced the January McKivision verdict from $2.25 billion to $400 million.

April 6, 2024: Billion-Dollar Verdict Reduced

A Missouri state court judge reduced the $1.56 billion jury verdict awarded to three plaintiffs in November of the previous year to $611 million.

January 30, 2023 –Roundup Verdicts

Here is the updated Roundup verdict scoreboard reflecting just how high the stakes have become for Bayer:

Year	Case	State	Verdict
2024	McKivision	Pennsylvania	$2.25 Billion
2023	Jones	California	Defense Verdict
2023	Martel	Pennsylvania	$3.46 Million
2023	Anderson and Two Others	Missouri	$1.56 Billion
2023	Dennis	California	$332 Million
2023	Caranci	Pennsylvania	$175 Million
2023	Durnell	Missouri	$1.25 Million
2023	McCostlin	Missouri	Defense Verdict
2023	Gordon	Missouri	Defense Verdict
2022	Ferro	Missouri	Defense Verdict
2022	Alesi	Missouri	Defense Verdict
2022	Johnson	Oregon	Defense Verdict
2022	Shelton	Missouri	Defense Verdict
2021	Stephens	California	Defense Verdict
2021	Clark	California	Defense Verdict
2019	Hardeman	MDL – California	$80.2 Million
2019	Pilliod	California	$2.05 Billion
2018	Johnson	California	$289.2 Million

The total amount for these verdicts stretched to a mind-boggling $6.7 billion by any reckoning. Even considering the defense wins, the mean payout for the last six jury trials involving Roundup-everything counted zero for Bayer’s victories-is an astounding $617,387,142.86.

January 26, 2024 – Philadelphia Jury Hits Bayer with $2.25 Billion Roundup Verdict

The ruling is that McKivision has to pay $2.25 billion. The jury awarded $250 million for compensatory damages and $2 billion as punitive damages. Aggressive jury; there were twelve jurors, of whom half had a college education, and two held master’s degrees. The plaintiffs have really hit more than just one mark: demographic men, women, educated, uneducated – nothing seemed to stick. Honestly, whoever was the bright mind behind that advice to Bayer legal for an “educated jury” probably misread the room. Bayer should promptly update the warning on the Roundup label and do what it did in the past-settle claims with the firms having the highest volume of claims.

January 11, 2024 – Judge Crumlish Condemns Monsanto’s Attempt to Disqualify Him After $175 Million Verdict

Judge Crumlish evidently shares the sentiment that Monsanto really does not behave well in the face of loss. Following the $175 million verdict, Judge Crumlish vehemently rejected Monsanto’s efforts to remove him from the decidedly lucrative case and called the motion simply a “transparent and manipulative tactic.” 

In his view, Monsanto’s intent was not in any way to contest the evidence, but rather to assault the integrity of the jury and of said trial process itself. Judge Crumlish went on to characterize Monsanto’s behavior as “obstructive” and “cynically diversionary.” 

Now, that might be a rare occurrence. They have done it before, including attempts to disqualify a California judge and charges against another Philadelphia judge of bias after a $3.5 million verdict.

December 6, 2023 – Philadelphia Jury Awards $3.5 Million to Woman in Roundup Cancer Case

Once again, Bayer has lost. Nearly $3.5 million was awarded by a jury in Philadelphia to a woman who testified that Roundup gave her cancer. After three weeks of trial and two days of deliberation, the jury found for $462,500 in compensatory damages and $3 million in punitive damages. 

This was Bayer’s latest in a string of five courtroom defeats. Another Roundup case is scheduled to begin in Philadelphia next month, and judging by the trend, the next verdict could easily exceed the $3.5 million awarded here.

To give some context, all plaintiffs have been awarded about $4.5 billion across 15 trials. On average, that translates to about $300 million per verdict. Multiply that average by 40,000 cases still pending, and the theoretical exposure is around $12 trillion. Of course, there is an issue with that figure because it is greatly exaggerated by multi-plaintiff trials; however, it shows how rough Bayer’s Roundup problem remains.

November 20, 2023 – Missouri Jury Orders Monsanto to Pay $1.5 Billion in Roundup Verdict

A Missouri jury has ordered Monsanto to pay a staggering amount of more than $1.5 billion to three former users of Roundup who later developed the disease called non-Hodgkin lymphoma. A Jefferson City state court awarded a grand total of compensatory damages of $61.1 million and $500 million in punitive damages to all or any of Valorie Gunther from New York, Jimmy Draeger from Missouri, and Daniel Anderson from California.

It is that, as the jury found, Monsanto is liable for failing to give adequate warnings on the cancer risk associated with Roundup. More of these very large verdicts are likely to carry weight into future settlements. Bayer goes on delaying resolution, hunting for a rosier turn, but every new verdict makes that dream seem less sanguine. And this is approaching an existential threat for the company.

Another verdict is right around the corner in Martel v. Nouryon Chemicals, and word from Philadelphia is expected shortly. Bayer should settle that right now, but it probably won’t.

October 31, 2023 – California Jury Delivers $332 Million Verdict in Roundup Case

A California jury awarded $332 million in damages in the Dennis case, $7 million in compensatory damages and $325 million in punitive damages. With a series of three great verdicts, within a span of weeks, amounting to over $500 million, this represents a watershed moment in the Roundup litigation.

Bayer had previously succeeded in nine trials, wins which were mainly gained by trying weaker cases. The flow of huge verdicts recently bears testimony to the limits of that strategy.

Like many others, Mr. Dennis used Roundup on his lawn and garden for 35 years and was diagnosed with non-Hodgkin lymphoma at the age of 51. These are not strange cases; it is, therefore, even more important that the verdicts are rendered. 

It is now reasonable to question whether Roundup constitutes an existential threat to Bayer. A reasonable settlement strategy might stem any further damage, but if the company instead pursues its current path, the situation could deteriorate with each succeeding trial.

October 28, 2023 – Jury Awards $175 Million in Caranci Roundup Case

In the Caranci case, a jury awarded $175 million, another devastating loss to Bayer. 

October 25, 2023 – Bayer Faces $1.25 Million Verdict After Refusing to Settle Roundup Case

Reports confirm that Bayer never made a settlement offer in the Roundup case that ended with a $1.25 million plaintiff verdict. The company lets only those cases go to trial in which it is confident; nevertheless, plaintiffs still win even in those cases.

Read about the AFFF Firefighting Lawsuit

Majority of Roundup Lawsuits have been Resolved

In March 2022, Bayer, parent of Roundup and Monsanto, declared that it was successful in reaching pre-agreements with about 98,000 Roundup lawsuits that will cover almost 80% of pending cases. Most of these settlements have been achieved by bulk arrangements with law firms mostly representing significant numbers of plaintiffs. By 2025, and after yet another round of resolutions in August, some 61,000 Roundup cases remain alive.

How the Roundup Settlement System Works

The Roundup settlement process determines payout amounts using a detailed point system. The pertinent factors that have caused a certain score for each individual are the type of cancer, treatment results, the individual’s young age, and the estimated loss of income. Higher point scores correspond to stronger claims and more severe injuries, with larger settlements; conversely, lower scores may lead to smaller settlements.

What Lies Ahead for Roundup Litigation?

Bayer strives to settle the remaining Roundup lawsuits while stressing that its future liabilities will be determined to a large extent by the outcome of Bayer’s appeal pending before the U.S. Supreme Court. The long arm of concern for Bayer is that some patients may develop a lymphoma due to Roundup exposure long after being exposed, meaning that new lawsuits could be initiated long into the future; this potential exposure continues to burden Bayer with major financial and reputational concerns.

Bayer’s Strategy to Limit Future Liability

Bayer plans to phase out Roundup containing glyphosate in retail outlets and replace it with a new formulation starting January 1, 2023, as part of its plans to keep any future claims at bay. However, by now, the shift had not materialized. Bayer’s other line of action is to challenge the emanating Supreme Court argument in the Hardeman case. Here, Bayer contends that Roundup lawsuits should be preempted under federal law, since the EPA has not mandated any cancer warning associated with glyphosate. If accepted, this argument will cut down several future claims, but up until now, Bayer’s chances appear dim.

Read about the CPAP Lawsuit

Frequently Asked Questions on Mansato Roundup Lawsuits