Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Philadelphia Jury Hits Monsanto with $2.25B Roundup Verdict

law.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 95 posts

Re: Philadelphia Jury Hits Monsanto with $2.25B Roundup Verdict

#21

Post by nick222226 »

chasil wrote: post #19
s1artibartfast wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Indeed. 250 million compensation + 2 billion punitive is an immense amount of money. The median wrongful death settlement in California is between $250,000 and $500,000, and the average payout for car accident deaths in the United States is around $1.5 million. I dont really understand the criteria around what counts as liability for a defective product. Cars and guns routinely kill people, but are useful tools. Roun…

This makes me think of the Oberlin College judgment. The jury awarded more than the law allowed to Gibson's bakery, so the $44 million dollar judgment was cut by the judge to $25. Obviously, both Monsanto and Purdue are in a whole different class and scale of harm, but the law can and does cap damages. I don't know why the limits weren't made plain to the jurors, as it just drug out the procedure. https://en.m.wikipe…

Reduced to $25 million, to be clear.

Re: Philadelphia Jury Hits Monsanto with $2.25B Roundup Verdict

#22

Post by thedailymail »

dylan604 wrote: post #20
elbasti wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I assume this comment is a reference to Purdue Pharma preemptively filing for bankrupcy after losing a bunch of lawsuits due to the (surely!) criminal way in which they--and the Sackler family that owns it--sold opiods. However, as much as I hate the Sacklers, I have to pipe in here out of a respect for the truth (Gell-Mann Amnesia style). The Purdue bankruptcy was not some sort of Machiavellian "get out of jail free…

> I assume this comment is a reference to Purdue Pharma sure, assume away. I was thinking more of J&J's talc=>asbestos, Alex Jones, and all of the other cases. It's not like the Sacklers are original thinkers. Some of us have memories longer than goldfishes

The J&J case is one of the most famous examples of "Texas two-step" bankruptcy, but I didn't know until now that there have only been four companies that used this strategy (all represented by the same law firm).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Texas_two-step_bankruptcy

Re: Philadelphia Jury Hits Monsanto with $2.25B Roundup Verdict

#24

Post by fnordpiglet »

s1artibartfast wrote: post #11
Seattle3503 wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

More likely Monsanto appeals and the damages get much smaller. Juries like to award much larger sums than judges.

Indeed. 250 million compensation + 2 billion punitive is an immense amount of money. The median wrongful death settlement in California is between $250,000 and $500,000, and the average payout for car accident deaths in the United States is around $1.5 million. I dont really understand the criteria around what counts as liability for a defective product. Cars and guns routinely kill people, but are useful tools. Roun…

It usually has something to do with willfully hiding evidence that the product is inherently unsafe and avoiding safety protocols that would save lives. The canonical case in my mind is the Ford Pinto. They knew the flaws in the design existed but valued the cost to fix them greater than the societal cost of deaths caused by the flaws. You find these in a lot of cases like this, big tobacco, Johnson and Johnson, Purdue, etc, often have essentially evil knowing decisions to hide safety issues with their product.

Cars (and to a lesser degree guns) are pretty well regulated and basically as long as you follow the spirit of the regulations and engage above board with regulators you’ll be ok. It’s a mutually agreed upon risk management between the public and the companies. There are definitely cases where a danger is known and thought acceptable and the law or regulation shifts, and you’re protected to some degree as long as you were in compliance and weren’t hiding an otherwise unknown risk. Likewise there are things you discover later and as long as you act on it in a forthright way you’re ok.

But risk management isn’t about avoiding all risks. It’s about balance, and being rigorously transparent.

Re: Philadelphia Jury Hits Monsanto with $2.25B Roundup Verdict

#26

Post by justrealist »

I feel like we need to acknowledge that 12 average jury pool members are probably not the best panel of scientific experts to determine whether a chemical is carcinogenic. Much less calculate the damages involved.

Like at this point it would be more scientific to run a Facebook poll.

Jury trials are a great system for criminal justice but kinda need to admit this is not the same.

Re: Philadelphia Jury Hits Monsanto with $2.25B Roundup Verdict

#27

Post by lestertomlin »

justrealist wrote: post #26

I feel like we need to acknowledge that 12 average jury pool members are probably not the best panel of scientific experts to determine whether a chemical is carcinogenic. Much less calculate the damages involved. Like at this point it would be more scientific to run a Facebook poll. Jury trials are a great system for criminal justice but kinda need to admit this is not the same.

That’s the point. Jury is a bunch of regular people. I think it’s actually pretty cool because otherwise decisions are based on “legal mumbo jumbo” that no “normal” person would ever be able to understand.

Re: Philadelphia Jury Hits Monsanto with $2.25B Roundup Verdict

#28

Post by danielmarkbruce »

hibikir wrote: post #17
dylan604 wrote: post #3

Waiting for upcoming news about Monsanto spinning off the Roundup division into a new company that suddenly files for bankruptcy.

Monsanto hasn't been a separate company for years: Bayer bought them out for 63 billion in 2018: A coup for the Monsanto CEO, as Bayer's total market cap today is 34 billion, and that includes all the pharma and chemical work too, not just crop science. When they were independent, their legal team had a very successful track record, but I am told the majority of them just retired with the very large windfall they got…

Why are they down so much?

Re: Philadelphia Jury Hits Monsanto with $2.25B Roundup Verdict

#29

Post by darth_avocado »

gopher_space wrote: post #18
google234123 wrote: post #5

This is so ridiculous, the science points to the fact that the claim that it causes cancer is not true... I really don't like the american justice system. We literally live next to coal plants that put chemicals in the air 24/7 that are certainly certainly causing cancer for people later... You can find studies showing certain meats are correlated with cancer, can we sue the grocery stores?

> This is so ridiculous, the science points to the fact that the claim that it causes cancer is not true. I just Kagi'd it and UW says non-hodgkins up by 40% with roundup exposure. I guess the question would be "whose science".

I don’t understand why this comment is downvoted. The studies do show a link between non Hodgkin’s lymphoma and roundup.

And if you want to dispute the studies, fine. But Monsanto settled for $10B on the round up lawsuits. That should tell you something.

Re: Philadelphia Jury Hits Monsanto with $2.25B Roundup Verdict

#30

Post by 0ckpuppet »

darth_avocado wrote: post #29
gopher_space wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This is so ridiculous, the science points to the fact that the claim that it causes cancer is not true. I just Kagi'd it and UW says non-hodgkins up by 40% with roundup exposure. I guess the question would be "whose science".

I don’t understand why this comment is downvoted. The studies do show a link between non Hodgkin’s lymphoma and roundup. And if you want to dispute the studies, fine. But Monsanto settled for $10B on the round up lawsuits. That should tell you something.

you don't suspect monsanto would pay to have negative comments downvoted in every corner of the internet?
Post reply on HN