The Legal Examiner Affiliate Network The Legal Examiner The Legal Examiner The Legal Examiner search instagram avvo phone envelope checkmark mail-reply spinner error close The Legal Examiner The Legal Examiner The Legal Examiner
Skip to main content

Recently, Bayer AG announced its plan to explore the possibility of resolving the over 13,400 lawsuits linked to Monsanto’s glyphosate-based weed killer Roundup. Bayer became liable for the lawsuits, which claim that long-term exposure to Roundup caused frequent users a type of cancer called non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma, after acquiring Monsanto for $63 billion in 2018.

Bayer’s announcement, which came on June 26, said that it had hired an external lawyer to advise its supervisory board on the lawsuits. Additionally, Bayer set up a committee designed specifically to assist in resolving the pending Roundup litigation. Shareholders reacted overwhelmingly positive to the announcement, with Bayer shares rising 8.7 percent one day later – the biggest daily gain in a decade. Since March, Bayer stocks have lost more than a fifth of their value.

Bayer has been criticized by shareholders in the past, who say it has mishandled the Roundup fallout since acquiring Monsanto. One major shareholder, Janus Henderson, said that these measures are sensible and could pave the way for an earlier-than-anticipated settlement: this “represents [Bayer’s] best chance to change momentum in sentiment.” Another major shareholder, Deka Investment, acknowledged that taking on additional legal expertise is the right step for Bayer. Elliot Management, another large shareholder, agreed with the notion that this development may lead to settlements.

This announcement came at what some are considering a promising time for Bayer. Less than a week later, on July 2, U.S. District Judge Vince Chhabria said that he would likely reduce the jury’s $80 million punitive damages award to Edwin Hardeman, the plaintiff in the first federal Roundup case. Hardeman was diagnosed with non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma after using Roundup on his 56-acre property for 26 years.

Right now, the best financial scenario for Bayer is likely a settlement deal that is affordable, along with farmers continuing to be able to use Roundup products – but that is not a given. More importantly, though, a settlement could deliver a much quicker and more certain resolution for thousands of plaintiffs whose cases are currently pending. Hopefully, the justice system moves quickly so that impacted individuals and their families can receive the compensation they deserve.


  1. Gravatar for jim seaton
    jim seaton

    to those farmers who are using the argument that glyphosate is bad but its far less toxic than most of the other chemicals we use just to let you know to any one who eats food or drinks water that argument is not particularly reassuring grow and go organic

  2. Gravatar for Lintee

    Bayer needs to settle fair and equitably to the Round Up plaintiffs.

    Shouting from the roof tops proclaiming Round Up's innocent isn't going to give Bayer any noteworthy merit nor public confidence in Bayer's future ventures.

    Understand this Bayer, you are not fooling the public. Bayer you are not only guilty in the court room but guilty on the world stage. Just look around, major customer after customer denouncing and questioning Round Up's safety and integrity has done nothing but resulted in loss of revenues in the billions.

    Man up!!! Do what is right. Settle, put this behind you and us. Nothing is going to bring our loved ones back or renew our health. However we can move on. Bayer this is your only answer. Be the company we can once again believe in..

  3. Gravatar for Tonya Morrisey
    Tonya Morrisey

    I watch my father-in-law do the best he can on a day to day basis. It's been a struggle for him. I work in a law enforcement setting and its no difference than what I see on a day to day basis. When some individual(s) attempting to avoid owning up to their wrongs. What bothers me the most is to know when those individual(s) hurt people and have knowledge of that, it's no difference than an individual(s) committing a crime and attempting to get away with it. The best practice is here, not to worry so much about how much money you can save., but the fact that you this company is taking years away from people's lives because they used your product and or either bought your product. Then used it for years, committed to using it and use it faithfully, which bought you tons of money in return. If I'm a paying customer and I buy a product and I don't like the product or find out the product is dangerous. I will return for a refund. My father-in-law and these affected individuals can't get a refund on life! Some are living their last days thanks to this product. So please at the minimum, don't fight paying these individuals, trying to save your billions that you've made. This product has hurt a lot of people and their families ate affected by it also. Think of the ones who have died and or living and have no knowledge of this information. How much longer will you keep this up? Please stop and be fair and settle with the legit claimants. You've taken away so much from them already. Do what you can to make things somewhat right and be accountable for the product that has brought you billions.

Comments for this article are closed.