“Repeated misconduct by plaintiffs’ counsel” influenced jurors who awarded more than $2 billion to a California couple in a trial over Roundup herbicide, according to Monsanto Co. in court documents seeking to overturn the verdict.

In a motion for a new trial filed Monday, Monsanto, now owned by Bayer AG, cited several remarks from plaintiffs attorneys during trial, such as the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency having “blood on their hands” and that glyphosate was “in the food. It’s all over the place.” Such “inflammatory argument” was among a list of reasons why Alameda County Superior Court Judge Winifred Smith should overturn the May 13 verdict or, at the very least, substantially reduce the award, Monsanto’s lawyers wrote.

This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.

To view this content, please continue to their sites.

Not a Lexis Advance® Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Why am I seeing this?

LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.

For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]