Supreme Court asks U.S. government for views on Bayer weedkiller case
By Lawrence Hurley and Ludwig Burger
The company and law firm names shown above are generated automatically based on the text of the article. We are improving this feature as we continue to test and develop in beta. We welcome feedback, which you can provide using the feedback tab on the right of the page.
WASHINGTON, Dec 13 (Reuters) - The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday asked President Joe Biden's administration for its views on whether the justices should hear Bayer AG's (BAYGn.DE) bid to dismiss claims by customers who contend its Roundup weedkiller causes cancer, as the company seeks to avoid potentially billions of dollars in damages.
Bayer in August filed a petition with the Supreme Court to reverse a lower court decision that upheld $25 million in damages awarded to California resident Edwin Hardeman, a Roundup user who blamed his cancer on the German pharmaceutical and chemical giant's glyphosate-based weedkillers. The Supreme Court's decision on whether to take up the matter is being closely watched as Bayer maneuvers to limit its legal liability in thousands of cases.
U.S. Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar in the coming months is due to file a brief expressing the administration's views.
Bayer has lost three appeals against verdicts that sided with users of Roundup, awarding them tens of millions of dollars each. The company has pinned hopes for relief on the conservative-majority Supreme Court, which has a reputation for being pro-business.
Bayer asked the Supreme Court to review the verdict in Hardeman's case, which was upheld by the San Francisco-based 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in May. Hardeman had regularly used Roundup for 26 years at his home in northern California before being diagnosed with a form of non-Hodgkin's lymphoma.
There are more than 25,000 related claims Bayer has not settled yet.
Bayer, which also makes aspirin, Yasmin birth-control pills and the stroke prevention drug Xarelto among other products, has argued that the cancer claims over Roundup and its active ingredient glyphosate go against sound science and product clearance from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. The EPA has upheld guidance that glyphosate is not carcinogenic and not a risk to public health when used as indicated on the label.
Bayer has said it should not be penalized for marketing a product deemed safe by the EPA and on which the agency would not allow a cancer warning to be printed.
The lawsuits against Bayer have said the company should have warned customers of the alleged cancer risk. Bayer wants the Supreme Court to find that the EPA label approval under a federal law called the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act preempts the "failure to warn" claims brought under state law.
Roundup-related lawsuits have dogged Bayer since it acquired the brand as part of its $63 billion purchase of agricultural seeds and pesticides maker Monsanto in 2018.
mMn sehr gut für Bayer. Denn angesichts der Wirtschaftsverbände, die sich in das Verfahren eingebracht haben, dürfte auf der US Regierung sehr viel Druck lasten, dem Supreme Court zu empfehlen, das Verfahren anzuhören. Wichtiger Etappensieg für Bayer.
Quelle: www.reuters.com/legal/government/...edkiller-case-2021-12-13/
Zurück
Weiter
