FREE Case Evaluation: 1-888-887-3117
The roundup class action lawsuit update as of mid-2025 reveals significant developments for those affected by this ongoing litigation. Here's what you need to know right now:
| Roundup Lawsuit Status (May 2025) | Key Details |
|---|---|
| Pending Cases | Approximately 67,000 lawsuits still active |
| Settled Cases | Nearly 100,000 cases resolved for over $11 billion |
| Recent Verdicts | $2.1 billion (Georgia, March 2025), $2.25 billion later reduced to $400 million (Philadelphia, January 2024) |
| Average Settlement | Between $5,000-$250,000 depending on case strength |
| Bayer's Response | Considering bankruptcy options, continuing appeals, pursuing legislative immunity |
| Scientific Classification | WHO classifies glyphosate as "probably carcinogenic to humans" |
The Roundup litigation continues to evolve rapidly, with Bayer facing mounting pressure from both courtrooms and shareholders. While the company has already paid approximately $10 billion in settlements, thousands of cases remain unresolved, particularly those alleging that exposure to Roundup's active ingredient, glyphosate, caused non-Hodgkin's lymphoma and other serious health conditions.
Recent court decisions have significantly impacted the trajectory of these cases. In March 2025, a Georgia jury awarded a plaintiff $2.1 billion after linking his cancer to decades of Roundup use. Earlier, in January 2024, a Philadelphia jury awarded $2.25 billion to another plaintiff, though this was later reduced to $400 million. These verdicts indicate that despite Bayer's continued defense, juries remain sympathetic to plaintiffs' claims.
Bayer continues to defend Roundup's safety, citing regulatory approvals and scientific studies supporting glyphosate's non-carcinogenic status. However, the company is also exploring alternative strategies, including potential bankruptcy filings for its Monsanto subsidiary and lobbying for legislative immunity in several states.
I'm Tim Burd, founder of Justice Hero, and I've been watching the roundup class action lawsuit update developments to help affected individuals steer this complex litigation and connect them with qualified legal representation.
Roundup class action lawsuit update word list:
The roundup class action lawsuit update reveals a legal battlefield of historic proportions. As we move through 2025, roughly 67,000 lawsuits remain active against Bayer (who bought Monsanto in 2018), while over 100,000 cases have already settled for a staggering $11+ billion.
If you're tracking these cases, you should know they're spread across multiple court systems. The federal cases are gathered in Multidistrict Litigation (MDL No. 2741) in Northern California under Judge Vince Chhabria's watchful eye. About 4,200 cases remain active in this MDL alone, with thousands more working their way through state courts nationwide.
A major blow to Bayer came just last month when the Western District Missouri Court of Appeals upheld a massive $611 million judgment for three cancer patients. This decision left Bayer executives scrambling, as they'd been banking on overturning this verdict.
Facing this mounting pressure, Bayer has set aside another $6 billion for future claims. More worrying for plaintiffs, though, are the whispers about a potential Chapter 11 bankruptcy filing for their Monsanto subsidiary – a strategic move that could cap their liability and force plaintiffs to accept smaller settlements.
The sheer scale of this litigation becomes clear when you look at how these cases are distributed:
| Court System | Pending Cases | Resolved Cases | Notable Features |
|---|---|---|---|
| Federal MDL (California) | ~4,285 | ~575 | Evidence sharing, bellwether trials |
| Missouri State Courts | ~12,000 | ~18,000 | Several large verdicts, mixed outcomes |
| California State Courts | ~9,500 | ~14,000 | First major verdicts occurred here |
| Pennsylvania Courts | ~8,000 | ~11,000 | Recent $2.25B verdict (reduced to $400M) |
| Other State Courts | ~33,215 | ~56,425 | Varied outcomes by jurisdiction |
| TOTAL | ~67,000 | ~100,000 | Over $11B in settlements to date |
This complex patchwork of cases illustrates why the roundup class action lawsuit update matters so much – different courts have different rules, creating unique challenges for both sides.
The legal landscape has shifted dramatically since early 2024, with several game-changing developments:
The Missouri Appellate Decision in May 2025 was a watershed moment. The court upheld that massive $611 million judgment, rejecting Bayer's arguments about evidence admissibility and federal preemption. This ruling established important precedents about what evidence juries can consider.
In Georgia, a jury delivered a stunning $2.1 billion verdict to John Barnes in March 2025. After using Roundup for 20 years on his property, Barnes developed non-Hodgkin's lymphoma. The jury awarded him $65 million in compensatory damages and a whopping $2 billion in punitive damages.
Not all news has been bad for Bayer, though. In June 2024, a Philadelphia judge reduced John McKivison's $2.25 billion verdict to $400 million, citing constitutional limits on punitive damages. Still, even the reduced amount remains one of the largest individual Roundup awards.
A troubling trend is emerging at the state legislative level. North Dakota passed House Bill 1318 in April 2025, creating a liability shield for pesticide manufacturers whose products receive EPA approval. This is part of Bayer's strategy to seek legislative protection in multiple states.
At the federal level, the Supreme Court has previously declined to review the Hardeman case, preserving a $25 million verdict. Bayer continues filing petitions for certiorari in other cases, hoping to establish that federal law preempts state-law claims.
Meanwhile, the EPA is reassessing glyphosate's safety following a 9th Circuit ruling that found flaws in their previous assessment. The outcome of this review could dramatically impact future litigation.
The roundup class action lawsuit update tells a story of justice that's both dramatic and sobering. When we look at recent courtroom outcomes, we see a pattern of eye-popping jury verdicts that often face reduction in the appeals process.
Take John Barnes from Georgia. In March 2025, a jury awarded him a staggering $2.1 billion after connecting his cancer to decades of Roundup use. Of that amount, $65 million was for his actual suffering, while $2 billion served as a punitive message to Bayer. Similarly, Pennsylvania resident John McKivison initially won $2.25 billion in January 2024, though courts later trimmed this to $400 million.
Other significant verdicts include Ernest Caranci's $175 million award in Missouri (currently being appealed) and a combined $611 million verdict for three Missouri plaintiffs that courts recently upheld despite Bayer's aggressive appeals.
But here's the reality check – these headline-grabbing numbers don't reflect what most people receive. The average settlement falls between $5,000 and $250,000, with most hovering around $150,000 based on the 2020 global settlement program.
Why such variation? Your potential compensation depends on several key factors. The severity and type of cancer matters enormously, as does how long and intensively you were exposed to Roundup. Younger diagnosis ages typically receive higher compensation, and your medical expenses and lost income factor in significantly. The strength of your evidence connecting Roundup to your illness and even which state you file in can dramatically affect your outcome.
On the financial side, these settlements operate on contingency fees, meaning attorneys typically receive 33-40% of the recovery plus case expenses. The silver lining for plaintiffs is that under IRC Section 104, personal injury settlements generally remain tax-free.
To handle thousands of claims fairly, Bayer and plaintiffs' attorneys created a sophisticated points system overseen by Special Master Kenneth Feinberg. Think of it as a formula designed to standardize compensation while still recognizing each person's unique circumstances.
The system starts by assigning base points for injury severity. Someone with advanced-stage non-Hodgkin's lymphoma requiring extensive treatment receives substantially more points than someone with an early-stage, easily treated condition. Your age at diagnosis factors in significantly too.
Next, exposure points get added based on how long and how often you used Roundup. Commercial applicators typically receive more points than occasional residential users. Whether you used protective equipment also affects your total.
Various multipliers then adjust your score. Strong medical evidence linking your cancer to Roundup exposure boosts your points, as does thorough documentation of your Roundup use. Some jurisdictions are more favorable to plaintiffs, resulting in higher multipliers.
Finally, your points convert to dollars through a formula designed to keep the total payout within settlement fund limits. If necessary, pro rata adjustments ensure all qualifying claimants receive fair compensation.
Many plaintiffs' attorneys argue this system undervalues the most severe cases, but it does attempt to create some consistency in a wildly complex litigation.
The courtroom scoreboard currently shows plaintiffs winning 14 of 24 trials – about 58% – with several verdicts exceeding $1 billion before reduction. But Bayer has been gaining ground, winning 10 trials, particularly in St. Louis courts where they've successfully excluded certain evidence.
Almost every substantial punitive damage award has faced post-trial reduction. Courts typically follow the Supreme Court's guideline that punitive damages shouldn't exceed nine times the compensatory amount. In the $611 million Missouri verdict, post-judgment interest actually pushed Bayer's liability above $700 million during the appeals process.
Geography matters enormously in these cases. Plaintiff-friendly jurisdictions like California and Georgia consistently produce larger verdicts than more conservative venues. This geographic disparity explains why both sides fight so hard over where cases will be heard.
If you're wondering about the details of settlements and payouts, our team at Justice Hero has compiled comprehensive information on Roundup Lawsuit Settlements and Payouts to help you understand what might be possible in your situation.
At the heart of the roundup class action lawsuit update is a heated scientific debate about whether glyphosate causes cancer. This controversy ignited in 2015 when the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), part of the World Health Organization, classified glyphosate as "probably carcinogenic to humans" (Group 2A). This watershed moment transformed Roundup from a common household product into the center of massive litigation.
The science behind these claims is compelling. A significant University of Washington meta-analysis published in 2019 found that people with high exposure to glyphosate-based herbicides faced a 41% higher risk of developing non-Hodgkin's lymphoma compared to those with minimal or no exposure. This wasn't just a minor correlation - it represented a substantial increased risk that couldn't be easily dismissed.
Scientists have uncovered several concerning mechanisms that might explain this link. Research shows glyphosate can cause DNA and chromosomal damage in human cells. It also triggers oxidative stress in the body, which can lead to cellular damage over time. Both animal studies showing increased tumor formation and real-world data from agricultural workers with high exposure rates further strengthen the connection.
While the EPA has historically maintained that glyphosate is "not likely to be carcinogenic to humans" when used according to label directions, this position has faced serious challenges. Some EPA scientists have privately disagreed with this conclusion, and in a significant blow to Bayer, the 9th Circuit Court found the EPA's assessment fundamentally flawed and ordered a complete reassessment.
Many researchers also point to another concern - it might not be just glyphosate alone. POEA (polyethoxylated tallow amine), a surfactant in many Roundup formulations, may actually be more toxic than glyphosate itself. The combination of ingredients could create a "perfect storm" effect that individual ingredient studies simply don't capture.
While non-Hodgkin's lymphoma (NHL) remains the primary cancer connected to Roundup in lawsuits, plaintiffs have alleged connections to several specific subtypes:
Diffuse Large B-cell Lymphoma (DLBCL) is the most common form of NHL and features prominently in many cases. Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia (CLL), a cancer affecting white blood cells, is also frequently cited. Other NHL subtypes in litigation include Follicular Lymphoma (a slow-growing form), Mantle Cell Lymphoma (rare and aggressive), and Burkitt Lymphoma (fast-growing).
Beyond these, some lawsuits mention Multiple Myeloma (cancer of plasma cells in bone marrow), thyroid cancer, reproductive harm, liver and kidney damage, and endocrine disruption. The scientific evidence varies across these conditions, with NHL and its subtypes having the strongest epidemiological support.
Bayer hasn't taken these allegations lying down. Their defense rests on several key arguments that they've consistently presented in courtrooms across America.
First, they emphasize regulatory consensus, pointing out that most global regulatory agencies, including the EPA, have concluded that glyphosate isn't carcinogenic when used as directed. This forms the cornerstone of their scientific defense.
They also argue for FIFRA preemption - claiming that the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act preempts state-law failure-to-warn claims because the EPA approved Roundup's label without cancer warnings.
Bayer regularly cites numerous scientific studies finding no causal link between glyphosate and cancer. They particularly highlight the Agricultural Health Study, which followed farmers for decades without establishing a clear connection.
In 2021, facing mounting pressure, Bayer announced a five-point plan to end Roundup litigation. This included settling existing claims, creating a class settlement for future claims, removing glyphosate from residential Roundup products, establishing an independent scientific advisory panel, and seeking Supreme Court review of preemption issues.
Their newest strategy involves pursuing legislative immunity at the state level. They've succeeded in North Dakota and Georgia while failing in Missouri. Despite these comprehensive efforts, Bayer's defense has yielded mixed results, with multiple large verdicts suggesting juries remain unconvinced by their scientific arguments.
Wondering if you qualify for the roundup class action lawsuit update? Let's break it down in simple terms. If Roundup has touched your life and your health, you might have a valid claim—but timing matters.
You likely qualify if you've been exposed to Roundup (whether in your garden, on a farm, or at work), later developed non-Hodgkin's lymphoma or a related cancer, and can show a reasonable connection between your exposure and illness. The key is acting before your state's deadline expires.
Most states give you between 1-3 years to file, starting from your diagnosis date, the moment you reasonably should have connected Roundup to your illness (known as the "findy rule"), or the date of death for wrongful death claims. These deadlines aren't flexible—courts enforce them strictly, which is why speaking with an attorney soon after diagnosis is so important.
Building a strong case requires evidence. You'll need medical records confirming your diagnosis, proof of your Roundup exposure through purchase receipts or work records, a timeline showing when you used the product and when health issues began, and expert testimony linking your specific exposure to your illness.
One important decision you'll face: should you join the larger MDL (Multi-District Litigation) or file individually in your state court? This choice affects everything from timeline to potential compensation, so it's not one to make without professional guidance.
The strength of your claim hinges on two critical elements: your specific diagnosis and your history of Roundup exposure.
Qualifying diagnoses primarily include non-Hodgkin's lymphoma and its subtypes like diffuse large B-cell lymphoma and follicular lymphoma. Other related conditions like chronic lymphocytic leukemia, multiple myeloma, and various lymphatic system cancers may also qualify.
As for evidence, you'll need three main types:
First, medical documentation matters enormously. This includes your official diagnosis from an oncologist, pathology reports confirming your specific cancer type, all treatment records and prognosis information, and your medical history leading up to diagnosis.
Second, you need solid exposure evidence. Purchase receipts for Roundup, employment records showing you worked with the product, photographs of you using it, witness statements confirming your regular application, property records for agricultural lands, and any spray logs or application records you maintained all strengthen your case significantly.
Finally, expert testimony ties everything together. Medical experts can link your exposure to your cancer, scientific experts can explain glyphosate toxicology, and occupational specialists can verify exposure patterns.
The most compelling cases typically involve regular Roundup use over five or more years, combined with a clear non-Hodgkin's lymphoma diagnosis and few alternative risk factors that might explain your illness.
The clock is ticking differently depending on where you live. California gives you 2 years from diagnosis or when you finded the connection. Texas allows 2 years from diagnosis. Florida provides 4 years for personal injury but only 2 for wrongful death claims. New Yorkers have 3 years from findy, Illinoisans get 2 years from diagnosis, and Missouri residents have a generous 5-year window.
Several factors can affect these deadlines in ways you might not expect. Tolling agreements sometimes come into play—these are special arrangements where plaintiffs' attorneys negotiate with Bayer to extend filing deadlines during settlement talks.
If Bayer pursues bankruptcy protection for its Monsanto subsidiary (as many speculate they might), this could impose new, shorter claim deadlines that override your state's normal timeframes—potentially closing your window of opportunity much faster.
The findy rule offers some flexibility in many states, allowing the clock to start only when you reasonably should have connected Roundup to your illness—not necessarily at diagnosis.
For families pursuing wrongful death claims, be especially careful—these typically have different (and often shorter) deadlines than personal injury claims.
Given these complexities, I can't stress this enough: talk to an attorney right away if you believe you have a claim. Even if you think it's been too long, certain exceptions might apply to your situation.
I've noticed there's often confusion about what exactly the roundup class action lawsuit update refers to. Let me clear this up for you.
Despite what many people think, most Roundup cancer lawsuits aren't part of a traditional class action at all. They're primarily handled through what's called multidistrict litigation (MDL).
In a true class action, everyone is lumped together in one lawsuit and typically receives similar compensation. It's a one-size-fits-all approach where you're automatically included unless you opt out.
The Roundup litigation works differently. In the MDL system (specifically MDL No. 2741 in the Northern District of California), each person maintains their own individual lawsuit, but these cases are grouped together for efficiency during the pre-trial phase. Your compensation is based on your specific circumstances – how long you were exposed, how severe your cancer is, and other personal factors.
The MDL uses "bellwether" trials – test cases that help both sides understand how juries might respond to the evidence. These early trials have resulted in some substantial verdicts that shaped later settlements.
There was an attempt at a true class action settlement for future claims in 2021, but Judge Chhabria rejected it as inadequate for protecting potential future victims. There was also a separate class action about deceptive labeling (seeking refunds rather than compensation for cancer), but that's not what most people are referring to when discussing the roundup class action lawsuit update.
This is probably the question I hear most often, and I wish I could give you a simple answer. The truth is that settlement amounts vary tremendously based on your specific situation.
The strongest cases – those with clear NHL diagnoses, extensive documented Roundup exposure over 10+ years, and limited other risk factors – have typically received between $175,000 and $250,000+. These Tier 1 cases usually involve significant medical expenses and strong causation evidence.
Tier 2 cases with moderate exposure (5-10 years) and some documentation of Roundup use have generally settled in the $75,000 to $175,000 range. These cases might have some alternative risk factors present.
Tier 3 cases with limited exposure documentation, significant alternative risk factors, or potential statute of limitations issues typically see settlements between $5,000 and $75,000.
The 2020 settlement averaged over $150,000 per plaintiff, though that included many of the strongest early cases. Your attorney's skill in negotiating and presenting your specific circumstances makes a significant difference in your outcome.
I should also mention that these are historical patterns, not guarantees. As the litigation landscape continues to evolve, future settlements may look different.
Good news – it's not necessarily too late to file a Roundup claim. I've worked with many clients who initially thought they had missed their chance but were still well within their rights to seek compensation.
Your ability to file depends on several key factors:
First, check your state's statute of limitations, which is typically 1-3 years from either your diagnosis or when you reasonably should have connected your illness to Roundup (what lawyers call the "findy rule"). If you're within this timeframe, you can still file.
Second, be aware that new cases continue to move forward, with several major verdicts happening as recently as 2025. The courts are still actively handling these claims.
Third, while Bayer has settled many cases, they're still negotiating settlements for pending claims and will likely need to address future claims as well.
The most pressing concern is the possibility of Bayer pursuing bankruptcy protection for Monsanto. If this happens, it could create a claims bar date that would effectively end new filings, making it urgent to file soon.
I've seen many clients successfully file claims years after their diagnosis once they finded the potential link to Roundup. However, I strongly recommend acting quickly. The legal landscape continues to evolve, and waiting could limit your options to seek justice.
If you believe you have a case, I encourage you to reach out to learn how to start your own claim as soon as possible.
The roundup class action lawsuit update as of mid-2025 paints a picture of justice slowly unfolding in one of America's largest mass torts. With 67,000 cases still working their way through the courts and Bayer having already paid over $11 billion to settle nearly 100,000 claims, this legal battle continues to reshape how we think about corporate accountability and consumer protection.
Recent developments tell a compelling story about where this litigation is heading. Juries across the country are still awarding substantial verdicts to plaintiffs, including the eye-popping $2.1 billion Georgia verdict just months ago. These outcomes suggest that average Americans, when presented with the evidence, continue to find Bayer responsible for failing to warn consumers about potential cancer risks.
Behind the scenes, Bayer appears to be seriously weighing a Chapter 11 bankruptcy filing for its Monsanto subsidiary – a strategic move that could cap their financial liability and force plaintiffs to accept smaller settlements. This approach, while potentially effective for shareholders, could leave many cancer patients with less compensation than they deserve.
We're also seeing a troubling trend of legislative immunity efforts, with Bayer successfully lobbying for legal shields in states like North Dakota and Georgia. These laws effectively prevent citizens from seeking justice in court, regardless of their injuries. Fortunately, similar efforts failed in Missouri, where courts recently upheld a $611 million verdict for three plaintiffs.
The scientific debate around glyphosate continues evolving too. While regulatory bodies remain divided, independent research consistently finds links between Roundup exposure and non-Hodgkin's lymphoma. The EPA's ongoing reassessment could significantly impact future cases.
After declining to hear the Hardeman case previously, the Supreme Court may eventually weigh in on whether federal pesticide regulations preempt state-law failure-to-warn claims – a decision that could dramatically alter the landscape for thousands of pending cases.
If you've been exposed to Roundup and developed non-Hodgkin's lymphoma or related cancers, the window for seeking compensation remains open – but acting quickly is essential. Statutes of limitations vary by state, and potential bankruptcy proceedings could create strict deadlines for filing claims.
At Justice Hero, we're committed to helping you steer this complex litigation and connect with qualified legal representation. If you believe you might have a claim, we encourage you to learn how to start your own claim and seek a free case evaluation.
The path to justice in Roundup litigation hasn't been straightforward, but for thousands of affected individuals and families, it has provided much-needed compensation and accountability. As this story continues unfolding in courtrooms across America, we'll keep monitoring developments and providing clear, actionable updates to help you understand your rights and options.
