Benzene & Emerging Toxic Torts Litigation

HarrisMartin's Benzene & Emerging Toxic Torts Litigation Report will track recent developments in litigation stemming from exposure to benzene, as well as a number of other emerging areas of toxic tort litigation, such as talc, silica, pesticides and other chemical exposures.



Issue #183, March 2020

Roundup Plaintiff Files Brief in Appeal, Contests MDL Court’s Decision to Reduce $75 Million Punitive Damage Verdict

A plaintiff whose punitive damage verdict was reduced by the federal court overseeing the national Roundup multidistrict litigation docket has filed his brief contesting the reduction, as well as Monsanto’s assignments of error regarding the verdict, arguing that the company’s conduct was reprehensible and continues to threaten the health of millions of consumers.

C-8 MDL Court Allows Plaintiff to File Motion for Summary Judgment on Statute of Limitations Over DuPont’s Objections

The federal court overseeing the national coordinated docket for C-8 water contamination personal injury claims has allowed the plaintiffs in one case to file a motion for summary judgment on the issue of the statute of limitations, saying that DuPont will not suffer prejudice from the plaintiffs’ efforts.

Shareholder Files Complaint Against Bayer’s Supervisors, Says Acquisition of Monsanto Has Inflicted Billions of Dollars in Damages

A Bayer shareholder has filed a lawsuit in New York state court, accusing certain defendants of ignoring warnings related to the acquisition of Monsanto and arguing that the acquisition has been “the worst corporate acquisition ever.”

Roundup MDL Judge Pushes Back Deadlines Again ‘At Request of Settlement Master’; Vacates Next Trial Date

The Roundup personal injury products liability multidistrict litigation has extended all deadlines in the MDL again at the “request of the settlement master,” but cautioned the parties that “no further continuances will be granted.”

DuPont Asks Court to Declare Mistrial in $50 Million C-8 Verdict, Says Allen Charge ‘Exerted Undue Coercive Pressure’ on Jury

DuPont has filed a motion for mistrial in a case that ended in a $50 million verdict, arguing that “circumstances surrounding the jury deliberations had an unconstitutionally coercive effect and a mistrial should be granted.”

C-8 MDL Judge Allows DuPont to File Post-Trial Motion Under Seal but Takes ‘Strong Issue’ with Defendant’s Characterization of Juror Conduct

The federal judge overseeing the C-8 water contamination multidistrict litigation docket has issued an order allowing DuPont to file portions its anticipated motion for a new trial under seal, saying that doing so will protect the privacy rights of a juror and the confidential nature of jury deliberations.

Juror Disagreement Delays Verdict in C-8 Water Contamination Trial; Deliberations to Resume Monday

Deliberations in a C-8 water contamination trial of two plaintiffs will resume on Monday, March 2, after jurors indicated on Friday that they had failed to reach a verdict in the kidney and testicular cancer cases.

HarrisMartin: Jury Awards $50 Million in 1 Case at Conclusion of C-8 Water Contamination Trial; Hung Jury in Second Plaintiff’s Case

An Ohio federal jury has awarded $50 million in one case at the conclusion of a consolidated C-8 water contamination trial of two cases and was ultimately unable to reach a verdict in the second case, HarrisMartin Publishing is reporting.

Issue #182, February 2020

C-8 Water Contamination Trial Enters Day 17; Plaintiffs Rest as DuPont Begins Defense

Parties involved in a consolidated C-8 water contamination trial have completed more than two weeks of trial, with the plaintiffs resting on the sixteenth day of trial before an Ohio federal jury, according to recent court documents.

State of California Responds to Request for Briefing on Preemption in Appeal of $289 Million Roundup Verdict

The State of California has responded to a California appellate court’s request for briefing on the issue of preemption in the appeal of a $289 million Roundup verdict, explaining that “FIFRA does not expressly displace claims under Proposition 65 of similar state common law claims because those state laws do not impose any requirement in addition to or distinct from the requirements imposed by FIFRA itself.”

Past Issues:


The HarrisMartin VerdicTrack lets you track verdicts by product, state, defendant, or expert.