Roundup non-Hodgkin Lymphoma Litigation — Attorney911 Pursues Bayer AG for Glyphosate Cancer Claims in Pasadena and Los Angeles County, Ralph Manginello’s 27+ Years of Federal-Court Trial Practice & Avvo-Rated Excellent 8.2, We Litigate California Design-Defect & Fraudulent-Concealment Theories to Counter the SCOTUS Preemption Ruling, Lupe Peña the Former Insurance-Defense Insider Who Knows How Global Agrochemical Manufacturers Value Claims, Preserving Pathology Evidence and Exposure Logs from Devil’s Gate Dam and Caltech Institutional Landscapes, Millions Recovered in Catastrophic Injury Cases, the Statute of Limitations Is Running — Free 24/7 Consultation, No Fee Unless We Win, Hablamos Español, 1-888-ATTY-911
The Pasadena Roundup Ruling: Why This “Major Blow” Is Not a Defeat for Your Cancer Claim If you are sitting at a kitchen table in Pasadena today, looking at a folder of oncology bills and a headline that says the U.S. Supreme Court just dealt a “major blow” to Roundup lawsuits, we want you to take a breath. The news sounds like a door slamming shut, but as trial attorneys who move through these courtrooms every day, we see a very different reality. The 7-2 ruling from the high court focused on a technical legal concept called “preemption.” The court held that because the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) approved the label on Roundup, federal law (FIFRA) prevents you from suing the company for “failing to warn” you about cancer on that same label. They are trying to use the federal government as a shield to hide the truth about glyphosate. But here is what the headline misses: failing to warn is only one door. At Attorney911, we have spent decades finding the doors that corporate lawyers forget to lock. While the “bad label” argument just got harder, the “bad product” argument remains as strong as ever. If you worked at…