Court Upholds $1.2 Million Verdict in Roundup Trial That Claimed Weedkiller Caused Non-Hodgkin’s Lymphoma

Monsanto cannot claim it is protected from liability by federal preemption laws, because it did not try to update Roundup warning labels, appeals court ruled.

A Missouri appeals court has rejected Monsanto’s bid to overturn a $1.2 million verdict in a Roundup lawsuit, in which a jury found the controversial weedkiller caused a Missouri man to develop non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma.

The verdict came in response to claims brought by John Durnell, who indicated at trial that he began using Roundup in 1966, as part of the Soulard Restoration Project in St. Louis. As a direct result of the exposure, he claimed that he was diagnosed with non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma several years later, and a state court jury agreed.

Roundup has been widely used for decades in the agricultural industry and for residential purposes, containing the active ingredient glyphosate. Although it has been marketed as safe for humans, research over the last several years has linked Roundup exposure to an increased risk of non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma and other adverse health effects.

In October 2023, a St. Louis jury awarded Durnell $1.25 million in damages, finding that Monsanto and its parent company, Bayer, failed to adequately warn consumers about the non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma risks from Roundup.

Monsanto filed a motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict (JNOV) after the verdict was announced, requesting that the award be set aside or that a new trial be conducted. However, the trial court rejected the motion and the manufacturer pursued an appeal to the Missouri Court of Appeals for the Eastern District.

Monsanto argued on appeal that the failure to warn claims should be preempted by federal law, indicating it could not change the warning labels on Roundup without approval from the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

However, in an opinion (PDF) issued on February 11, the appeals court upheld the verdict for Durnell and dismissed Monsanto’s arguments.

“Monsanto has not met its demanding burden of showing an irreconcilable conflict between state and federal law in this case,” the appeals court determined. “The record contains no evidence that Monsanto either informed the EPA of the justifications for a change to its warning label or that the EPA has informed Monsanto it would not approve such a warning, and Monsanto does not specifically make these arguments on appeal.”

Roundup Litigation

Durnell’s claim is one of more than 120,000 Roundup lawsuits that have been filed against Bayer and Monsanto in recent years, each raising similar allegations that users developed non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma from the weed killer, either when using the product in an agricultural setting or around the home.

The litigation began to emerge in 2015, when the World Health Organization’s International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) decided to classify glyphosate in Roundup as a probable cancer-causing agent.

After spending more than $10 billion in Roundup settlements, Bayer announced in 2021 that it would reformulate Roundup and remove the active ingredient glyphosate from consumer versions of the weed killer. However, the companies continue to face thousands of individual lawsuits that failed to resolve, and new claims continue to be brought as former users are diagnosed with non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma.