Attorneys from across the country have bombarded a California federal court with objections to a proposed more than $10 billion settlement of claims that a weed killer first brought to the market by Monsanto caused cancer, prompting a hearing delay.
Ninety-three law firms and 167 lawyers filed a joint brief opposing the settlement, particularly those provisions relating to potential future claims and the establishment of a "secret" science panel.
President of the national trial lawyers lobby, American Association of Justice, Lisa Blue, individually and on behalf of the organization’s approximately 14,000 members, added her objections.
Judge Vince Chhabria, of the U.S. District Court in San Francisco, is managing the multidistrict litigation (MDL) and was due to hold a hearing at the end of this month.
The proposed settlement would see Bayer pay out $9.6 billion to cover current claims and $2 billion for future ones.
But Chhabria agreed to postpone the hearing until mid-May after plaintiff attorneys filed a motion asking for time to read and respond to the objections.
Bayer, which took over the St. Louis-based Monsanto in 2018, is attempting to resolve tens of thousands of claims its Roundup product caused users to contract non-Hodgkins lymphoma. The company has repeatedly, inside and outside court, said that there is no evidence its product causes cancer.
Three trials, all in state court, have ended with verdicts in favor of the plaintiffs, and awards of tens of millions of dollars. Bayer is appealing all verdicts and awards.
But further trials have largely stalled as Bayer, and attorneys for some plaintiffs, have attempted to hammer out a deal.
Last summer, Chhabria refused to sign off on the first proposed settlement.
The terms of the settlement has pitted the negotiating attorneys against representatives of other claimants and the wider trial bar community.
"This proposed settlement is so far beyond the pale there is virtually no chance it will ultimately be approved," Arthur H. Bryant of Bailey Glasser's office in Oakland, California, the lead author of the brief on behalf of attorneys and law firms. told the Northern California Record.
While it is possible that a single judge, in this case Chhabria, could sign off off such a deal, it will not survive appeals, Bryant said.
Under the terms of the settlement, all litigation is stayed for four years while a science panel reviews the evidence, or not, linking Roundup to cancer.
Further, current class members, while they may be able to sue after the four years if they do not make a claim or are unhappy with the amount, they will be barred from seeking punitive damages, said Bryant.
"It allows Monsanto to keep selling Roundup and causing cancer as long as it wants. There is simply no legal basis for this – or many other aspects of the proposed settlement," he added. "It's an unconscionable gift to Monsanto."
There is no precedent for a settlement to include unknown future claimants, Bryant said, adding two attempts to do so in connection with asbestos claims were rejected by the U.S. Supreme Court.