Round Up the Usual Lawyers Attorneys relied on junk science to win $289.2 million in damages
https://www.wsj.com/articles/round-up-the-usual-lawyers-1534375738
The world’s most widely used herbicide isn’t carcinogenic, but it’s now a corporate toxin. On Friday a California jury ordered Monsanto to pay $289.2 million in damages for failing to give sufficient warning about the “substantial dangers” of its signature weed killer known as Roundup. Shares of Bayer, which recently acquired Monsanto, have plummeted this week in anticipation of a legal onslaught from plaintiff lawyers.
The San Francisco Superior Court case involved Dewayne “Lee” Johnson, who was diagnosed with non-Hodgkin lymphoma in 2014. Working as a school groundskeeper, Mr. Johnson routinely used Roundup, and he now claims its active ingredient, glyphosate, caused his cancer. The jury examined gory photos of the lesions that covered up to 80% of his body, and in testimony Mr. Johnson described how even wearing clothing caused excruciating pain. Such emotional testimony would elicit sympathy in any jury of human beings.
But legal claims are supposed to be about the law and evidence. And the problem for Mr. Johnson is that there’s overwhelming scientific evidence that glyphosate does not cause cancer. One comprehensive study, published last November in the Journal of the National Cancer Institute, investigated cancer incidence among nearly 45,000 licensed pesticide applicators who had been exposed to glyphosate.
The study found “no evidence of an association between glyphosate use and risk of any solid tumors or lymphoid malignancies”—including non-Hodgkin lymphoma. Even the Environmental Protection Agency, far from a corporate shill, has likewise concluded that glyphosate is safe.
The outlier in the scientific community is the World Health Organization’s International Agency for Research on Cancer. Over the years this group has claimed pickled vegetables and “very hot beverages” may cause cancer, and its risk assessments suggest that working as a barber or hairdresser is only slightly less hazardous than being exposed to mustard gas. So it wasn’t shocking in 2015 when the group concluded that glyphosate is also “probably carcinogenic.”
A Reuters investigation later revealed that the U.N. outfit had repeatedly ignored and omitted evidence that showed no link between glyphosate and cancer. Christopher Portier, an adviser who worked on the group’s glyphosate determination, was concurrently accepting payments from Lundy & Lundy, a law firm behind several cancer-related class-action lawsuits. Lo, Mr. Portier also testified as an expert witness for Mr. Johnson.
Judge Suzanne Ramos Bolanos remarked twice during the trial that the evidence for punitive damages was “thin,” and Monsanto plans to push back on Friday’s verdict. In post-trial motions, the company will ask the judge to reexamine the jury’s verdict. Judge Bolanos has the authority to vacate the jury’s decision, declare a mistrial and call a new one, or reduce Monsanto’s damages. The company may also appeal to a higher court.
Mr. Johnson’s case was the first glyphosate lawsuit to make it to trial, but more will follow. In its Securities and Exchange Commission filing for the second quarter of 2018, Monsanto said it’s facing more than 5,000 similar suits. And after Friday’s verdict, one of Mr. Johnson’s attorneys, R. Brent Wisner, told Law.com that “I had 200 calls this morning from people wanting to sign up.” Too bad there’s not a weed killer for junk lawsuits.
Comments are closed.
