(March 5, 2024)
It’s interesting to hear about the outcome of Kline v. Monsanto. Legal battles involving major corporations like Monsanto often garner significant attention due to their potential implications. Would you like to discuss more details about the case?
(March 1, 2024)
Consolidating Roundup-related lawsuits in New Jersey under Multi-County Litigation (MCL) could indeed streamline the legal process. While each case would maintain its independence, grouping them together would allow for more efficient handling of common issues. This approach mirrors the federal multidistrict litigation (MDL) model, which has been used in similar mass tort cases.
By consolidating cases under a single judge, it facilitates the management of discovery and potentially speeds up the overall litigation process. The use of bellwether trials can also provide insight into how future cases may be resolved, helping both plaintiffs and defendants gauge the strength of their positions and potentially encouraging settlement negotiations.
Overall, organizing the Roundup litigation in this manner in New Jersey could lead to more efficient proceedings and potentially faster resolution for all parties involved.
Roundup Lawsuit there are 4,177 Roundup lawsuit cases still open out of a total of 4,712 cases filed in federal multidistrict litigation in California. Roundup lawyers are still accepting claims to go to trial potentially or to negotiate a settlement.
(February 29, 2024)
Sounds like an important development! Is this related to a legal case or some other matter?
(February 28, 2024)
Certainly, let’s discuss the developments in the Cloud and Dennis cases involving Monsanto’s Roundup product.
In the Cloud case, the jury in Delaware is deliberating on a wrongful death lawsuit filed by the family of a man from South Carolina. The plaintiffs’ attorneys are seeking $142 million in punitive damages, arguing that Monsanto’s conduct in relation to Roundup warrants such punishment. They point to evidence suggesting economic bullying, ghostwriting, covert attacks on scientific research, and a lack of remorse as grounds for punitive damages. While Delaware has a high bar for punitive damages, similar cases involving Roundup have seen substantial awards, indicating a possible outcome favoring the plaintiffs.
In contrast, the Dennis case in San Diego saw a significant reduction in the jury award. Former land surveyor Michael Dennis, who claimed his cancer was caused by Roundup, initially received a verdict of $332 million, which was later reduced by Judge Kevin Enright to $28 million. The judge deemed the punitive damages excessive in relation to the compensatory damages, citing due process concerns based on standards set by the U.S. Supreme Court. Bayer, which acquired Monsanto, views this reduction as a favorable outcome, despite it being a fraction of the original verdict.
These cases underscore the ongoing legal battles surrounding Roundup and its alleged health risks, as well as the complexities involved in determining appropriate punitive damages.
The increase in Roundup trials across multiple states, including Arkansas, California, and Pennsylvania, indeed indicates mounting pressure on Monsanto regarding the alleged link between Roundup exposure and NHL. The diversity of cases, ranging from wrongful death to personal injury claims, reflects the widespread concern over the potential health risks associated with Roundup.
The outcomes of these trials could significantly impact Monsanto, both financially and reputationally. With multiple trials underway simultaneously, the company may face challenges in defending its product and addressing the concerns raised by plaintiffs.
Given the momentum of these lawsuits and the potential risks involved, it’s understandable to anticipate an increase in Roundup settlements in the near future. Monsanto may seek to mitigate its legal exposure by reaching agreements with plaintiffs rather than facing the uncertainty of continued litigation and potentially adverse verdicts.
(January 2, 2024)
Monsanto. The jury ruled in favor of Monsanto, dismissing allegations of negligence, design defect, strict liability, and negligent failure to warn. We know plaintiffs will not win every case.
(January 7, 2024)
The Ontario Superior Court of Justice in Canada has certified a nationwide class-action lawsuit directed against Monsanto and Bayer, the manufacturers of the herbicide Roundup.
(January 9, 2024 )
A new trial in Philadelphia, McKivision v. Monsanto, is underway. Plaintiffs’ lawyers will advance the themes that have been working: Roundup causes non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma, and Monsanto hid studies that show the association to sell more product.
(January 15, 2024)
Only three new cases were added to the Roundup class action MDL in federal court over the last month. There are currently 4,177 total cases pending in this MDL.
(January 22, 2024)
The energy in this litigation is focused on the McKivision trial that started on January 8th. We should have a verdict soon. Hopes are high. January 15, 2023: Recently, the focus of the Roundup cancer lawsuits has shifted from the federal court MDL to state courts.
(January 26, 2024)
The verdict is back in McKivision: $2.25 billion. The jury awarded $250 million in compensatory damages and $2 billion in punitive damages. This was an educated jury.
(January 30, 2024)
Bloomberg has an article today talking about the significant pressure Bayer is under to develop a new strategy for handling its Roundup weedkiller litigation. The answer for Bayer is simple… but painful. They have $6 billion left set aside for Roundup settlement payouts.
(March 27, 2024)
Before we discuss the Camp Lejeune lawsuits and our lawyers’ estimates of expected settlement amounts, let’s examine the latest news in the toxic water lawsuits.
Camp Lejeune Lawsuits: Victims’ Quest for Justice Amid Slow Settlements
As of yesterday, there have been 1,662 suits filed under the Camp Lejeune Justice Act, with approximately 176,662 administrative claims filed with the Navy. However, when it comes to Settlements related to Camp Lejeune, the numbers are relatively low. The Torts Branch has identified 51 cases in Litigation that qualify for the Elective Option. These cases involve various injuries, including bladder cancer, kidney cancer, Non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma, kidney disease, Parkinson’s disease, leukemia, and multiple myeloma.
Among these cases, 21 offers have been accepted by Plaintiffs, covering a range of conditions. For instance, settlements for bladder cancer ranged from $150,000 to $450,000, settlements for kidney disease ranged from $100,000 to $250,000, and settlements for kidney cancer ranged from $150,000 to $300,000, among others. However, nine offers wurden rejected, and 15 offers have expired. Additionally, six offers are pending.
Separately, the Department of Justice (DOJ) is also settling cases, with 59 Claimants approved for offers based on Navy-provided information. So far, 24 Settlement-Offers have been accepted, zwei rejected, 25 expired, and eight are pending.
Payments totaling $5,950,000 have been made for Settlements offered by both the Navy and the DOJ. These payments cover various conditions and range from $100,000 to $450,000. However, despite these settlements, victims are understandably frustrated by the slow pace of the process, which is not aligned with Congress’s intentions.
Before we discuss the Camp Lejeune lawsuits and our lawyers’ estimates of expected settlement amounts, let’s examine the
latest news in the toxic water lawsuits
(March 9, 2024)
It seems like the government’s agreement to produce the muster rolls later this month is significant progress for the
plaintiffs. Muster rolls play a crucial role in documenting the presence, absence, and statuses of military personnel at
Camp Lejeune and other military bases. The existence of digitized muster rolls from a previous digitization project
conducted by the USMC and the VA between 2013 and 2015 could be a valuable resource for the plaintiffs. Access to this
database or other data sources resulting from the digitization effort could potentially help the plaintiffs prove their
presence at Lejeune, supporting their claims or cases.
(March 5, 2024)
In the Camp Lejeune water contamination litigation, both sides have come to an agreement, outlined in the new Case
Management Order #11, to streamline the pretrial discovery process. Here are the key points of the agreement:
This stipulation aims to expedite the handling of numerous lawsuits by reducing the number of medical exams and expert
testimonies, thereby enhancing efficiency for both parties and facilitating faster trials.
Camp Lejeune Water Contamination Lawsuit
Before we discuss the Camp Lejeune lawsuits and our lawyers’ estimates of expected settlement amounts, let’s examine the
latest news in the toxic water lawsuits.
(February 28, 2024)
Based on the latest government report on Camp Lejeune settlements, it appears that the Elective Option plan is facing
significant challenges. With 170,000 claims looming, the current approach may not be sustainable. The distribution of
cases by type of injury highlights the severity and variety of health issues faced by claimants.
Settlement offers have been made and accepted in some cases, while others have been rejected or expired. The involvement
of both the Torts Branch and the Department of Justice underscores the complexity of the situation.
Given the sheer number of claims and the potential strain on the court system, it’s crucial for the government to
explore alternative paths to settlement. Judges are likely to play a pivotal role in facilitating a resolution to avoid
an overwhelming influx of lawsuits. This shift in approach reflects an acknowledgment of the magnitude of the issue and
the need for a more efficient and effective resolution process.
Camp Lejeune litigation continues to expand, and the first families have started to receive compensation from their
claims. While more than 1,400 lawsuits and over 152,000 administrative claims have been filed, time is running out for
additional victims to take action.
(February 26, 2024)
Before we discuss the Camp Lejeune lawsuits and our lawyers’ estimates of expected settlement amounts,
let’s examine the latest news in the toxic water lawsuits.
(February 26, 2024)
It seems like the court has outlined Track 2 to include specific cancers and diseases, namely:
These conditions are estimated to constitute approximately 25% of the Camp Lejeune claims. The court emphasizes that the
selection of these cases for early trial is not indicative of their strength but rather aims to expedite the resolution
process for frequently occurring illnesses. The parties involved are directed to present a discovery plan proposal for
the illnesses categorized under Track 2 within 10 days of the order.
(February 21, 2024)
The water modeling project conducted by the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR) regarding the
contamination at Camp Lejeune is crucial for understanding the historical levels of volatile organic compounds (VOCs),
specifically trichloroethylene (TCE) and tetrachloroethylene (PCE), in the groundwater. This project consists of
numerous interconnected files that provide a comprehensive record of the contamination over several decades.
The request by the plaintiffs’ attorneys to produce the project file in its original, native format stems from the
necessity to maintain its structure and usability. By doing so, they aim to preserve the integrity of the data and
ensure that it remains accessible for analysis and interpretation. The proposed method by the government to produce the
file in disassembled pieces could disrupt its organization, rendering it difficult to utilize effectively.
The plaintiffs argue that the ATSDR was mandated by law to conduct this study, and the findings from the water modeling
project have already demonstrated the presence of toxins in the water supply. Therefore, ensuring the accessibility and
usability of the project file is critical for addressing the implications of the contamination and pursuing appropriate
legal actions.
To resolve this issue, the plaintiffs suggest producing a “mirror” copy of the file in its native format, allowing for a
direct comparison with the government’s copy to verify data integrity. They emphasize that producing documents in their
native format is supported by legal principles and common sense when the functionality of such files is essential.
Overall, the plaintiffs’ motion underscores the importance of maintaining the integrity and accessibility of the water
modelingproject file and expresses willingness to collaborate with the government and the court to achieve this goal.
(February 20, 2024)
It sounds like the Department of Justice (DOJ) is pushing back against the motion for summary judgment by arguing that
proving presence at Camp Lejeune for 30 days and having an illness possibly caused by the water is not sufficient for
settlement. This motion remains significant, particularly because it was filed at a crucial time. Since there won’t be
Camp Lejeune jury trials in the short term, the outcome of this motion could have a significant impact on the
settlementprocess for affected individuals.
(February 15, 2024)
One potential approach to avoid slowing down the litigation while still addressing the appeal filed on behalf of the two
cases is to propose a bifurcation or severance of the appeal process. Bifurcation involves separating the appeal into
distinct phases or issues, allowing certain aspects to proceed while others are held in abeyance. In this case, the
appeal could proceed for the two cases in question, while the remainder of the litigation continues unaffected.
Here’s how this approach could be implemented:
2. Limited Scope of Appeal:The appeal would be limited to the specific issues raised in the two cases, such as the
dismissal of jury trial demands. This would ensure that the appeal does not encompass the entire litigation and only
pertains to the matters relevant to those two cases.
By proposing a bifurcation of the appeal process, the plaintiffs can seek to address their concerns without unduly
slowing down the overall litigation involving Camp Lejeune lawsuits.
(January 3, 2024)
Of these, 14 cases have been dismissed, including 11 voluntary dismissals and three pro se cases. The cases are divided
among four judges: Judge Dever (363 cases), Judge Myers (379 cases), Judge Boyle (355 cases), and Judge Flanagan (374
cases).
(January 5, 2024)
As of January 2024, payoutstotaling $2,050,000 in Camp Lejeune settlements were made, according to a joint status report
filed by the federal government and plaintiff lawyers. Since the PACT Act of 2022 passed, justice for Camp Lejeune
victims has been frustratingly slow.
(January 13, 2024)
A list of 100 toxic water contamination lawsuits was submitted to the court. One of these cases will be the first Camp
Lejeune suit to go to trial. Again, the Track One cases are bladder cancer, kidney cancer, leukemia, non-Hodgkin’s
lymphoma, and Parkinson’s disease.
(January 16, 2024)
on general causation in the Camp Lejeune litigation. This would mean that the plaintiff must only show they were on the
base for 30 days and they have a condition that is as least as likely as not causally related to toxic water.
(January 18, 2024)
A key study on cancer rates caused by contaminated water at Marine Corps Base Camp Lejeune conducted by U.S. government
researchers is expected to be released later this month, according to the U.S. Justice Department
(January 19, 2024)
Camp Lejeunepayoutstotaling $2.2 million have been made, according to a joint status report filed by the federal
government and plaintiff lawyers on January 16, 2024.
(January 25, 2024)
The first Camp Lejeune trial may be in April. So the biggest question is whether these will be bench trials decided by a
judge or jury trials. The next big question is whether the first trial will involve one plaintiff or multiple
plaintiffs.
(January 30, 2024)
The government wants more time to respond to plaintiffs’ motion for summary judgment. Attorneys for Camp Lejeune victims
are challenging the government’s request. Previously, the attorneys have agreed to extensions requested by the
government on other deadlines.
(March 27, 2024 Update)
Deciphering Complex Legal Rulings: Navigating Daubert Motions in Federal Court Cases
It sounds like you’re dealing with a complex legal situation involving the resubmission of Daubert-Motions in a federal-court-case. Given the circumstances you’ve described, it’s understandable that you may find the ruling confusing or frustrating, especially if it seems to deviate from previous orders or expectations.
Speculating on the motives behind the court’s decision can be challenging without more context or information about the specifics of the case. However, your suggestion that the ruling may be intended to pressure plaintiffs into settlement is a possibility. Courts sometimes use procedural decisions to encourage settlement negotiations or to ensure that cases proceed efficiently.
If you’re considering your next steps, it might be helpful to consult with your legal team to discuss the implications of the ruling and strategize on how to best navigate the situation. They can provide tailored advice based on their understanding of the case and relevant legal principles.
(March 5, 2024 Update)
The Miami baby powder trial has ended in a mistrial. This update was provided at 10:17 a.m. We’ll have more information to report tomorrow.
(March 1, 2024)
In the Miami ovarian cancer talc powder trial, the defense has begun presenting its case. Dr. Edwin Kuffner, Johnson & Johnson’s Chief Medical Officer, testified to the jury that an extensive review of scientific studies conducted by his department found no evidence linking the use of baby powder to ovarian cancer. He emphasized that if any evidence had been discovered, Johnson & Johnson would have immediately removed the product from the market rather than issuing a warning.
However, it’s worth noting that Johnson & Johnson did remove talc powder from the market in 2020, citing “business reasons.” This decision suggests that there may have been significant disagreement with Dr. Kuffner’s assertion within the company or among external stakeholders.
(March 1, 2024 Update)
It sounds like the trial is heating up with conflicting testimonies. Dr. Kuffner’s statement about the lack of evidence linking talc powder to ovarian cancer seems to contradict the experiences and beliefs of many individuals who have used the product. The decision by J&J to remove talc powder from the market could indeed be seen as a tacit acknowledgment of the concerns surrounding its safety. It will be interesting to see how the defense continues to present its case in light of these issues.
J&J has agreed to pay more than $700 million to resolve an investigation by more than 40 states into the marketing of talcum powder products. This agreement will settle all current and pending state-level suits accusing J&J of concealing the cancer risk of talcum powder products. This does not impact the more-than-50,000 cases consolidated into the federal MDL.
There were 342 necrotizing enterocolitis baby formula lawsuits pending in multidistrict litigation. MDL 3026 is before U.S. District Judge Rebecca Pallmeyer in the Northern District of Illinois. Litigation is still in the initial stages, and there have been no approved settlements or jury verdicts.
Plaintiffs in these lawsuits claimed they developed ovarian cancer and mesothelioma after using J&J’s talcum powder products for years. There have been two public settlements, one in October 2020 and the second in April 2023. While J&J offered to settle the cases, the health care giant still faces 53,733 talcum powder lawsuits in New Jersey as of January 2024.
J&J’s first 2020 settlement came shortly after the company announced it would stop selling talcum powder products in the U.S. and Canada in May 2020. Before the announcement, J&J issued a talcum powder recall for 33,000 bottles of Johnson’s Baby Powder after the U.S. Food and Drug Administration found trace amounts of asbestos in a sample. In August 2022, J&J announced it would stop selling talcum powder products globally in 2023.
In January 2024, J&J tentatively agreed to a new, $700 million settlement with over 40 U.S. states related to its allegedly deceptive talcum powder marketing. The settlement wouldn’t directly affect individual talcum powder lawsuits, but it could avert future case filings.
342 Enfamil and Similac lawsuits are pending multidistrict litigation. MDL 3026 is before U.S. District Judge Rebecca Pallmeyer in the Northern District of Illinois. Cases name manufacturers Mead Johnson and Abbott as defendants in necrotizing enterocolitis baby formula lawsuits.
Here are the developments in the still-growing Paraquat lawsuit:
(March 1, 2024)
At the beginning of last year, the Paraquat MDL was seeing an average of over 250 new cases per month. However, there was a significant slowdown around the holiday season, with less than 100 new cases added between November and January. Last month, there was a resurgence, with 241 new cases added, bringing the total case count to 5,318.
A new Paraquat lawsuit was filed yesterday in MDL-3004. The plaintiff claims that the failure of the defendants to provide adequate warnings led to direct exposure to Paraquat and a lack of public awareness about the risks of Parkinson’s and renal disease associated with the herbicide. As a result, the plaintiff, who was regularly exposed to Paraquat through direct contact and pesticide drift while working as a farm worker and herbicide applicator in Homestead, Florida from 1978 to 2004, developed Parkinson’s Disease around 2014. The lawsuit seeks compensation for emotional and mental anguish, medical expenses, and other economic and non-economic damages caused by the defendants’ actions and inactions.
(February 28, 2024)
The continued heavy use of pesticides, despite decades of awareness about their dangers, highlights a significant failure in fully implementing and enforcing anti-abuse protocols. Despite the establishment of regulatory bodies like the EPA and strengthening of laws like the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act, dangerous pesticides like Paraquat are still approved and widely used. A recent editorial in the New Republic criticizes the EPA for not fully utilizing its authority to protect endangered species and for being lenient on products like Roundup and Paraquat. The influence of agribusiness lobbying and extensive legal challenges have further diluted regulatory efforts, exacerbating the environmental and health impacts of pesticide use.
The number of pending cases in the Paraquat MDL dropped by 21 over the last month. This is significant for an MDL that has averaged over 150 new cases per month for the last 2 years.
There has been a lot of bad Zantac lawsuit news. Incredibly, all of this bad news revolves around one person’s opinion of the scientific merit of these lawsuits. But there is still a chance this litigation turns in 2023. There was a trial date set for July 24, 2023 but that case settled.
Here are the latest Zantac news and updates followed by an explanation of this litigation:
The Daubert hearings are over in Delaware. It is up to the judge now.
Are the Zantac lawsuits back? Attorneys are expected to tangle in a Delaware courtroom next week in a multiday battle over the admissibility of expert reports and testimony related to thousands of lawsuits that have been filed in state court in Delaware. Superior Court Judge Vivian L. Medinilla is presiding over a state court MDL-like proceeding alleging Zantac caused cancer. If these cases go well – i.e., the experts are permitted to testify at trial as they have been in California state court – the Zantac litigation will be back in the spotlight.
I know many of you are closely following the NEC baby formula lawsuit. So before we get into the substance of these lawsuits, let me give you a quick update on the latest in the litigation
(March 1, 2024 )
It seems like the number of new cases in the NEC infant formula MDL has slowed down a bit compared to January. With 16 additional cases added, bringing the total to 450 pending cases, there’s still a significant volume of legal matters to address.
There were 342 necrotizing enterocolitis baby formula lawsuits pending in multidistrict litigation. MDL 3026 is before U.S. District Judge Rebecca Pallmeyer in the Northern District of Illinois. Litigation is still in the initial stages, and there have been no approved settlements or jury verdicts.
