The Wall Street Journal | Editorial Board
A California jury awarded a stunning $2.055 billion Monday to a couple who claim that Bayer AG’s Roundup weed killer caused their cancer. But would the judgment have been different if the judge had allowed the jury to see contradictory evidence?
Law360 | By Dorothy Atkins
On Wednesday, Monsanto’s counsel said they plan to challenge all three verdicts, noting that there are “jurors of scientists” around the world, including at the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, who have reviewed the risks of Roundup’s active ingredient, glyphosate, and concluded that it’s safe.
Agri-Pulse | By Steve Davies
Bayer says there are many issues on appeal that need to be decided. “None of our verdicts have been subject to appeal and there are several critical legal issues that must be assessed at the appellate level that cover causation, failure to warn, punitive damages and even whether cases based on state law claims are preempted by federal law,” Bayer spokesman Chris Loder said.
Leverkusen / Whippany, May 13, 2019 – Bayer released the following statement in reaction to a jury verdict in favor of the plaintiffs in the case of Pilliod v. Monsanto, a trial conducted before Judge Winifred Smith in the Superior Court of the State of California for the County of Alameda. This is the first […]
The Recorder | By Amanda Bronstad
In a motion filed Monday, Monsanto, now owned by Bayer, said it feared that plaintiffs attorney R. Brent Wisner, of Baum Hedlund Aristei & Goldman in Los Angeles, would repeat some of the controversial remarks he made during his closing argument in the first trial, which ended with a $289 million verdict.
On May 7, 2019, Monsanto filed a motion to exclude improper closing argument in an effort to minimize the necessity of objections and set forth clear parameters for inappropriate topics in advance of closing arguments. Read Monsanto’s Motion to Exclude Improper Closing Argument here.
Northern California Record | By Rich Peters
Expert Dr. Robert Phalen said in the Alameda Superior Court that glyphosate, the key chemical in Roundup, is not easily absorbed by the human body and argued that a high dosage rate is unlikely despite decades of the product’s use by the plaintiffs.
Courthouse News Service | By Maria Dinzeo
Monsanto wrapped its defense with testimony from Dr. Alexandra Levine, an oncologist with the City of Hope cancer center. Levine said decades of spraying Roundup did not contribute to Alva Pilliod’s illness.
The following is Bayer’s statement regarding Judge Winifred Smith’s ruling on Monsanto’s Motion for Nonsuit in the Pilliod glyphosate-based herbicide trial in the Superior Court of the State of California for the County of Alameda. “Bayer is disappointed with the Court’s decision, as we believe that the plaintiffs have not presented sufficient evidence to support […]
The following is Bayer’s statement regarding Monsanto’s Motion for Nonsuit in the Pilliod glyphosate-based herbicide trial before Judge Winifred Smith in the Superior Court of the State of California for the County of Alameda. “Bayer believes that the plaintiffs have failed to provide sufficient evidence to support their claims, which should be dismissed on multiple […]