Chemical Giant’s Legal Strategy Yields Success in Latest Product Safety Case

In the Womack Roundup product liability trial, a Philadelphia jury ruled in favor of Monsanto on November 15, 2024. The verdict in the Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas under Judge Michael Erdos adds to Monsanto’s record of fifteen favorable outcomes in its last twenty-two trials. The case centered on the company’s glyphosate-based herbicide products, which Monsanto defended with scientific and regulatory evidence. The company will petition the U.S. Supreme Court in 2025 to address conflicting federal court decisions regarding state-based failure to warn claims.

5 Key Points

  • Monsanto has won 15 of its last 22 Roundup trials, including three in Philadelphia courts.
  • The verdict reinforces Monsanto’s defense strategy based on scientific and regulatory evidence.
  • The company will file a Supreme Court petition in 2025 to resolve conflicting federal court decisions.
  • Monsanto defends Roundup’s safety based on EPA assessments and worldwide regulatory consensus.
  • The case highlights the tension between state-level warning requirements and federal EPA approvals.

Philadelphia Court Delivers Third Verdict for Monsanto

The Womack verdict from the Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas follows two similar decisions in the jurisdiction. Monsanto stated from its Whippany, New Jersey headquarters: “The jury’s verdict validates the Company’s strategy of taking cases to trial based on strong scientific and regulatory evidence.” The company points to worldwide regulatory assessments that have approved glyphosate-based herbicides. In defending the Womack case, Monsanto presented evidence from EPA safety assessments and international regulatory bodies that Roundup products do not cause cancer when used as directed. “While we have great sympathy for anyone who suffers a loss or injury, the science proves that Roundup is safe to use and not carcinogenic,” the company stated.

Circuit Court Split Prompts Supreme Court Filing

The Third Circuit Court of Appeals Schaffner decision created a legal divide with other federal courts over state-based warning requirements. Monsanto will file its Supreme Court petition in early 2025. The case would reach the Supreme Court’s 2025-2026 docket if accepted—the core issue centers on whether federal law preempts state-based failure to warn claims in pesticide cases. The Third Circuit’s interpretation differs from other federal courts’ rulings on similar cases, creating uncertainty for manufacturers who comply with EPA labeling requirements. Monsanto’s legal team will select cases highlighting this jurisdictional conflict for the Supreme Court’s review.

Agricultural Groups Support Federal Warning Standards

Monsanto and several agricultural organizations are lobbying state and federal lawmakers to standardize warning labels. Their proposed legislation would establish EPA registration and approved labeling as sufficient proof of safety warnings. The company stated that EPA-approved pesticides face lawsuits despite meeting federal safety requirements. The initiative aims to protect farmers’ access to EPA-approved crop protection tools while maintaining safety standards. Agricultural organizations argue that conflicting state and federal requirements confuse manufacturers and users of these products. Monsanto emphasized that Roundup remains “a critical tool that farmers rely on to produce affordable food and feed the world.”