Lawsuits over the safety of glyphosate—the active ingredient in popular weed-killing products like Roundup®—usually start after a consumer or employee learns that he or she has developed non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma or some other health problem. A medical diagnosis is typically crucial to these kinds of cases, helping show that the plaintiff (the person who is suing) is entitled to financial compensation.
The first lawsuit to go to trial that claimed that glyphosate causes cancer was in 2018. The plaintiffs in that and other cases involving Roundup® successfully established a link between that product and the onset of their non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma. Monsanto—acquired by Bayer also in 2018, and the manufacturer of Roundup®—was ordered to pay millions upon millions of dollars in damages.
In 2020, Bayer/Monsanto agreed to settle the majority of Roundup® cases for more than $10 billion, although the judge has expressed concerns over that agreement (including how it might apply to future cases), and the parties seem to have gone back to the drawing board.
Most Roundup® cases rely on a legal concept called "product liability," in which the plaintiff tries to show that a product is unreasonably dangerous or that the manufacturer failed to properly warn consumers of health risks associated with the product (note that Roundup® hasn't been recalled). Besides Monsanto, lawsuits against other defendants are also possible, including the product retailer or an employer that required the plaintiff to use Roundup®.
In any personal injury or product liability case, including lawsuits over herbicides like Roundup®, the specifics of the plaintiff’s health problems are critical. They shape the value of the case, making an accurate diagnosis essential.
Diagnosis goes straight to the nature and extent of the plaintiff’s losses ("damages" in legalese). A glyphosate case almost always includes both “economic” damages (covering the cost of medical treatment, lost income, and other quantifiable losses) and “non-economic” damages (applying to pain and suffering, loss of enjoyment of life, and similar, more subjective consequences of the plaintiff's health problems). Learn more about how much your Roundup® case might be worth.
Manufacturers like Monsanto have disputed contentions that glyphosate is a carcinogen, pointing to determinations by entities like the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). When faced with a lawsuit over the safety of glyphosate products, Monsanto and other companies may well argue that the plaintiff doesn't actually have any disease, or that the plaintiff’s health problems are attributable to some other cause.
That’s part of why diagnosis is so important to any case—an undiagnosed disease or an inaccurate diagnosis makes it much easier for the defense to argue that the plaintiff hasn’t proven that the health problems came from use of the product. Indeed, it's a good idea to see a doctor at the first sign of any glyphosate-related health problems—to protect not only any lawsuit you decide to file, but also your health.
Laws called "statutes of limitations" set time limits on the right to file a lawsuit.
Since health problems linked to Roundup®/glyphosate can progress gradually, it's not always clear when the plaintiff's "injury" actually occurred for purposes of the filing deadline. In some states (like California), the date the person knew (or should have known in the eyes of the law) that the illness was related to glyphosate is typically the start of the statutory time period. In Roundup® cases, this could be the date on which the plaintiff was diagnosed with non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma or another condition (perhaps a form of leukemia, for example). But other factors can influence when the statute of limitations "clock" is said to start. In some jurisdictions, that the plaintiff became or should have become aware of the injury or illness is what matters, not their potential or actual knowledge of the cause of that harm. Product manufacturers have also been known to argue that the onset of symptoms (not necessarily a clear diagnosis) is enough to start the statute of limitations "clock" in certain cases, and some courts have agreed. (More: What if symptoms of Roundup®-related health problems don't show up right away?)
Bottom line: If you wait too long to file your lawsuit, you might be barred from pursuing a Roundup® case. An extension of the deadline might be possible, but you should consult a lawyer as soon as you begin to think about whether you have a viable case.
Many states have a specific statute of limitations for product liability lawsuits, while in other jurisdictions the limitations period for general personal injury lawsuits will apply. Either way, the filing deadline in most states ranges from one to six years for a lawsuit over health problems caused by glyphosate. For wrongful death lawsuits, a different statute of limitations applies (usually setting a deadline of one to two years from the decedent's death). For details on how the statute of limitations affects your situation, talk to a lawyer.
Most lawyers will not start a Roundup® lawsuit until they have confirmed that a possible client has non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma or some other health problem that could be linked to use of Roundup® or another glyphosate-based product. (Learn more about how lawyers decide to take an injury case.)
Some attorneys will arrange for a health assessment (a physical examination and imaging tests) for potential clients who have a history of long-term use of a glyphosate-based product (the potential client is employed as a groundskeeper, for example). Other times attorneys will order medical records from the potential client’s doctor or hospital and send the material to medical experts for evaluation.
If your doctor does not think you have a glyphosate-related disease, but a lawyer's medical expert thinks you do, you can take the expert’s report to your own doctor for a follow-up exam, or seek a second opinion from a different doctor.
When a lawyer takes your Roundup® case, he or she will determine which defendant(s) to sue and then file a "complaint" in court. The complaint is the legal document that starts the lawsuit and asks for damages from the defendant. (Note that a lawsuit doesn't always need to be filed; any product liability lawsuit can settle out of court, at any time. See the timeline of a typical Roundup® case.)
Next, the case moves into the "discovery" phase, when both sides gather evidence. Your lawyer might need to order additional medical documentation for retained experts to review. Your lawyer's medical experts might also examine you.
Defendants are usually entitled to see whatever medical information the plaintiff’s lawyer has that’s relevant to the case. If you have a case, your lawyer will probably need to provide the defense with a list of facilities where you've been examined or treated. The plaintiff’s lawyer usually hands over this kind of information as "answers to interrogatories," part of the discovery phase.
When the defense attorneys decide they want to look at specific medical records the plaintiff’s lawyer hasn’t already provided, the plaintiff often has to give authorization allowing the release of further medical information. Because of privacy regulations, each authorization must be specific to the facility, so the plaintiff might have to sign a lot of forms.
Sometimes the defense asks for medical information by issuing a subpoena to a facility. If they take this route, they have to notify the plaintiff’s attorney. If the request is for something inappropriate or irrelevant, the attorney can try to block the subpoena or review records first to protect the plaintiff’s privacy.
Normally, the defense can also have its own medical expert examine the plaintiff (this step is called an "independent medical examination"). The plaintiff’s attorney helps arrange such an exam and should protect the client from any improprieties, such as medical tests that aren’t related to the plaintiff’s claims.
If you have a case and it gets to the point of a deposition (or even trial), the defense will ask you about your health generally, your glyphosate-related health problems, your diagnosis, and your treatment. Sometimes plaintiffs’ deposition (and trial) answers differ from their written answers to interrogatories because of a mistake in memory. These small discrepancies are normal and extremely unlikely to affect the plaintiff’s case. If you have a case, you don't need to prove that your diagnosis is correct or even understand the medical details; expert witnesses will weigh in on those subjects.
If you’re considering filing a Roundup®/glyphosate lawsuit, your best first step might be to discuss your situation with an attorney. Learn more about finding the right attorney for you and your Roundup® case.