KANSAS CITY, Mo. – In a recent court ruling, Bayer has successfully persuaded a Missouri judge to significantly reduce the damages awarded to three former users of its Roundup weedkiller. The plaintiffs blamed their cancers on the popular product and were initially awarded $1.5 billion. However, the judge has now reduced this amount by nearly $1 billion to approximately $550 million.
While the judge denied Bayer’s requests for a new trial or to dismiss the verdict entirely, the punitive damages portion of the award was drastically reduced. This decision comes after the jury initially awarded the plaintiffs $61.1 million in actual damages and $500 million each in punitive damages. The case represents one of the largest verdicts in the past four years regarding litigation over the weedkiller.
Bayer plans to pursue further legal action by asking Missouri’s appellate courts to review the entire verdict. The company argues that the court did not correctly apply the law on damages, despite reducing the excessive damage award. Since its acquisition of Monsanto, from which Roundup was inherited, Bayer has seen its market value decline by approximately 70%.
The controversy surrounding Roundup and its potential link to cancer has been ongoing for years. While Bayer continues to defend the safety of its product, this ruling adds to the legal and financial challenges faced by the company. The outcome of this case may have broader implications for other Roundup-related lawsuits pending across the United States.
Environmental and consumer advocacy groups have long raised concerns about the potential health risks associated with the herbicide. The reduction in damages awarded in this case may be seen as a setback for those who believe there should be stricter regulations on the use of Roundup and other similar weedkillers.
Bayer’s legal battle over Roundup is far from over, and the company’s decision to appeal this verdict indicates its commitment to challenging the outcome. As the debate surrounding the safety of Roundup continues, the final outcome of this case could have significant implications for Bayer, the agrochemical industry, and public health.