Join our newsletter to stay up to date on cases and settlements.
Have you or a loved one been diagnosed with Non-Hodgkin's Lymphoma (NHL) or Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia (CLL) after using Roundup? You may be entitled to compensation.
Last Update
North Dakota has enacted House Bill 1318, granting pesticide manufacturers legal protection from failure-to-warn lawsuits involving EPA-approved products. Signed into law by Governor Kelly Armstrong, the statute blocks claims if product labeling meets federal standards, limiting legal recourse for individuals alleging harm. The law is a significant development for Bayer, which has faced extensive litigation over Roundup’s alleged link to non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma. While this marks a legal win for industry in an agriculture-driven state, it stops short of granting full immunity. Similar legislation is under consideration in Georgia, Missouri, and other states.
A Mississippi man has filed a lawsuit in the Roundup MDL, alleging that prolonged exposure to glyphosate-based herbicides caused his non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma, diagnosed in 2022. The complaint claims that Roundup was defectively designed and lacked adequate warnings, despite long-term use on the plaintiff’s property. It further alleges that the manufacturer knew or should have known of cancer risks linked to glyphosate but failed to inform consumers. Central to the case is the 2015 WHO classification of glyphosate as a probable carcinogen. The plaintiff also asserts that safer alternatives existed and that the product’s safety messaging was misleading and incomplet
Bayer is once again attempting to have the Supreme Court block Roundup cancer lawsuits, arguing that federal law supersedes state warnings because the EPA does not mandate a cancer warning label. The Supreme Court previously rejected this argument in 2021, and little has changed since. The EPA's lack of action does not absolve Bayer, as state juries continue to rule in favor of plaintiffs. The likelihood of the Court intervening at this stage remains low.
A Georgia jury has ordered Bayer to pay $2.1 billion to a plaintiff who developed non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma after using Roundup. The verdict includes $65 million in compensatory damages and $2 billion in punitive damages, signaling strong opposition to Bayer’s handling of glyphosate risks. Bayer is expected to appeal, aiming to reduce the award, as it has in past cases. Despite a $10 billion settlement, over 60,000 Roundup lawsuits remain. Juries continue to issue massive verdicts, raising doubts about Bayer’s legal strategy. With growing litigation costs, the company faces increasing financial and public pressure.
When you think of weed killers, there’s a good chance Roundup is the first that comes to mind. It’s frequently used in agriculture, meaning you probably consume produce treated with the herbicide on a regular basis. You may have even used it yourself on your lawn or garden.
Despite Roundup’s widespread use, the weedkiller has serious safety concerns. In one of the biggest hits to its hotly disputed safety profile, thousands of people have filed lawsuits claiming Roundup’s active ingredient, glyphosate, caused them to develop serious health problems—including cancers like non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL), leukemia, and multiple myeloma.
Roundup lawsuits have already resulted in billions of dollars in payouts and major changes to the herbicide’s ingredient list, demonstrating plaintiffs’ power to enact change. The litigation is ongoing, and impacted parties are encouraged to seek justice by filing a Roundup claim against owners Monsanto and Bayer.
Learn more about glyphosate, the Roundup lawsuits, and if you or a loved one may qualify.
All over the United States, lawsuits have been filed against Monsanto and Bayer by those claiming that Roundup weed killer caused them to develop cancer.
The lawsuits make serious allegations, including:
Roundup is controversial because exposure to it has been linked to cancer in humans. If you’ve tried researching the weedkiller’s safety, you likely encountered conflicting information that left you confused. Some health agencies recognize glyphosate’s carcinogenic properties while others do not, making the risks difficult to understand.
Certain agencies label glyphosate a probable human carcinogen (cancer-causing substance), such as:
Others deny glyphosate’s link to cancer, including:
So why the conflicting—and wavering—opinions? Some believe the answer lies in the way glyphosate studies were funded. Agencies like the IARC that label the chemical a carcinogen did not consider industry-funded studies. On the other hand, the EPA and EFSA defend glyphosate’s safety based on studies funded by Monsanto and Bayer—leading to major concerns about bias and industry influence.
Shockingly, some evidence suggests that Monsanto worked with the EPA to repress reports that exposed glyphosate’s risks. Former scientific advisers to the EPA even claim that the agency failed to follow its own scientific protocol when assessing glyphosate’s safety, resulting in an invalid conclusion regarding the chemical’s risks.
The Roundup lawsuit is for anyone who developed cancer after being exposed to the weedkiller. This includes professionals who used the herbicide at work or those who used it in their own lawns and gardens.
You may qualify for the lawsuit if you meet requirements such as the following:
You may also qualify for the lawsuit if you have been diagnosed with the following cancer(s):
If you do not have a valid cancer diagnosis from your doctor but are experiencing health issues related to glyphosate, you may still qualify for the class action.
The best way to learn about your legal options is by speaking with a qualified attorney. We suggest completing the form at the top of the page to start the process of joining the lawsuit.
Concerningly, a large body of research points to glyphosate’s cancer-causing potential. These are just a few of many such studies:
At no point have Monsanto and Bayer ever admitted to the dangers of Roundup; in fact, they continue to stand by glyphosate’s safety even in the face of thousands of plaintiffs who claim their cancer was caused by exposure to the Roundup weedkiller. But the pressure is on, and victims’ voices are becoming increasingly harder to ignore as plaintiffs continually demand answers from these corporate giants.
Heartbreakingly, these disturbing research findings reach far beyond the academic setting—countless patients suffer the catastrophic real-life consequences of Roundup exposure. Thousands of them have bravely come forward to hold Monsanto and Bayer accountable for the devastation they’ve caused.
These are just a few of their stories.
Employed as a school groundskeeper in California in 2013, Dewayne “Lee” Johnson began frequently using Ranger Pro, Monsanto’s commercial-grade, glyphosate-based herbicide similar to Roundup.
Reassured that the weed killer was “safe enough to drink,” Johnson wasn’t alarmed when he was drenched in it from head to toe during a workplace accident. Not long after, he noticed a lesion on his knee, which continued to spread—eventually engulfing his entire body. This was the first symptom that led to his eventual diagnosis of non-Hodgkin lymphoma.
Johnson fought for answers, but his pleas for help went unanswered by Monsanto. As his condition continued to deteriorate, he filed a lawsuit against the biopharmaceutical behemoth. Johnson’s case served as the bellwether trial that set the stage for future Roundup lawsuits.
A jury ruled in his favor, and he was initially awarded $289 million. Johnson ultimately received $20.5 in damages following Monsanto’s appeal.
Since the 1970s, Alva and Alberta Pilliod relied on Roundup to maintain a well-manicured lawn. Married for over 50 years, the couple trusted Monsanto’s stance on Roundup’s safety and felt confident using the weedkiller around their two kids and four grandchildren.
Incredibly, both Alva and Alberta were eventually diagnosed with non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma (NHL). Alva was diagnosed with NHL of the bones in 2011, and Alberta received a diagnosis of NHL brain cancer in 2015.
The Pilliods believe their diagnoses are a direct result of Roundup exposure over the decades. They sued Monsanto in 2017, claiming the corporation knew of glyphosate’s dangers but neglected to warn consumers. The couple further asserted they would have used proper protective equipment had they known of the risks.
A jury ruled in favor of the Pilliods, who were first awarded $2 billion in damages. Following several appeals, the couple eventually received $87 million.
Over three decades, William Melissen routinely used Roundup both at work and home. Melissen believed the glyphosate-based weedkiller was safe to use since Monsanto failed to provide any cancer-related warnings on the product’s label.
In 2020, when he was just 51 years old, the Pennsylvania man was diagnosed with non-Hodgkin lymphoma. Once he became aware of glyphosate’s link to cancer, he was certain Roundup exposure was to blame for his NHL diagnosis.
Melissen and his wife, Margaret, filed a lawsuit against Monsanto and Bayer in 2021. Though the powerful corporations staunchly defended Roundup’s safety, a jury eventually ruled in favor of the Melissens, awarding them $78 million in damages.
If you or a loved one was harmed by Roundup weed killer, you may be considering joining the lawsuit settlement. But cancer diagnoses often come with soaring medical bills, lost wages, and other financial strains, so you might be concerned about how much it costs to hire an attorney.
Fortunately, most lawyers who work on Roundup cases don’t require upfront fees. Instead, they work on a contingency fee basis. That means you only pay if you win your case. If your case is successful, your attorney is paid a portion of your compensation. This gives all individuals impacted by Roundup an equal chance at justice.
This is an advertisement. OnlyClassActions is not a law firm or referral service, and we do not provide legal advice. OnlyClassActions provides a free service for individuals seeking legal representation, and we do not charge you to be connected with an attorney. We do not recommend or endorse any attorneys that pay to participate. OnlyClassActions utilizes a pool of attorneys in each jurisdiction, and attorneys are selected through a round-robin process without our evaluating your legal situation when selecting which attorney will receive your information. OnlyClassActions makes no representation about the quality of legal services or the qualifications of any attorney participating in our pool. Information you submit will be shared with third-party attorney(s). An attorney-client relationship is not formed when you submit information through the form. Hiring a lawyer is a critical decision and should not be predicated solely on comments, advertisements, or other content found on any website. You are under no obligation to retain a lawyer who contacts you through this service.
Add Comment