Monsanto Company Missouri Cases

Mark and Karen McCostlin appealed the trial court's grant of a directed verdict in favor of Monsanto Company in their strict liability and negligence action, alleging Mr. McCostlin's exposure to Roundup caused his non-Hodgkin's Lymphoma. The McCostlins contended their expert testimony established a submissible case on causation, the trial court misinterpreted evidence, and erred in denying a motion to recall an expert and sustaining an objection during redirect. The appellate court affirmed the trial court's judgment, holding that the McCostlins' causation expert failed to demonstrate a causal connection, and the trial court did not err in its procedural and evidentiary rulings.

John L. Durnell sued Monsanto Company, alleging that exposure to Roundup caused his non-Hodgkin's lymphoma, asserting claims including strict liability failure to warn. A jury found in favor of Durnell on the strict liability failure to warn claim, awarding $1.25 million in compensatory damages. Monsanto appealed, arguing that Durnell's claim was both expressly and impliedly preempted by federal law. The appellate court affirmed the trial court's judgment, holding that the state-law claim was not preempted by FIFRA.

Sharlean Gordon sued Monsanto Company, alleging that her prolonged exposure to Roundup and its ingredient glyphosate caused her to develop non-Hodgkin's lymphoma, asserting claims of strict liability product defect, strict liability failure to warn, and negligence. Following a jury verdict in favor of Monsanto, and the trial court's denial of Gordon's motion for a new trial, Gordon appealed. The Eastern District of Missouri affirmed the judgment, finding no reversible error in the trial court's evidentiary rulings regarding the exclusion of a scientific publication, the restriction of expert testimony, or the admission of foreign regulatory documents.

Stacey Moore sued Monsanto Company, alleging that his exposure to Roundup caused non-Hodgkin's Lymphoma. After a jury returned a verdict for Monsanto, Moore appealed, asserting the circuit court erred by excluding his expert witness, overruling his motion for a new trial based on Monsanto's opening statement, and failing to strike a venireperson for cause. The Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, affirmed the circuit court's judgment, finding no abuse of discretion in any of the challenged rulings.