Judge pressures Parkinson’s patients over Syngenta paraquat settlement

A federal judge overseeing nationwide litigation involving allegations that exposure to paraquat weed killing products causes Parkinson’s disease is applying pressure to plaintiffs who are not accepting settlement agreements proposed by paraquat maker Syngenta.

US District Judge Nancy Rosenstengel has ordered plaintiffs who do not agree to the terms of Syngenta’s settlement plan to meet with a “special master” by mid-July to ensure that they are “making a fully informed decision not to participate.” Additionally, the judge has required that many plaintiffs choosing to opt out of the settlement undergo depositions by early August, along with “narrow third-party discovery” related to their use of paraquat.

The judge noted that a significant number of plaintiffs choosing not to participate in the settlement come from just a few law firms.  The judge cited as an example the Nachawati Law Group, noting that out of 217 of the firm’s paraquat clients, 183 had opted out of the settlement.

“The Court would like to gain a better understanding of the possible reasons for this high number of opt-out cases,” Rosenstengel wrote in a recent order. 

The judge selected a portion of each law firm’s plaintiffs for a “full work-up.”

The actions by Rosenstengel are unusual in such cases, according to several lawyers who declined to comment on the record but said without attribution that they see the tactics as undue pressure on plaintiffs, many who are advanced in age and suffering from the debilitating conditions that come with Parkinson’s.

The moves by the judge come roughly a year after Syngenta signed a master settlement agreement seeking to end the litigation that has spawned more than 8,000 cases around the US. Judge Rosenstengel has blocked cases  from moving forward to trial since the settlement effort was announced, ordering repeated stays “to allow the settlement process to unfold.”

Judge Rosenstengel declined to comment. But three attorneys selected by the judge as co-lead counsel in the paraquat litigation issued a statement applauding the moves by Judge Rosenstengel.

“Our focus remains on securing fair compensation for all those afflicted by Parkinson’s disease due to their exposure to paraquat. We appreciate Judge Rosenstengel’s efforts to ensure all plaintiffs are fully informed of the benefits they may be eligible for under the settlement program,” attorneys Khaldoun Baghdadi, Sarah Shoemake Doles, and Peter Flowers said in the statement.

Last year, Judge Rosenstengel threatened to sanction one attorney who was raising questions about the fairness of the settlement plan. In an October hearing over the issue of sanctioning attorney Aimee Wagstaff, Judge Rosenstengel said Wagstaff appeared to be trying to “subvert” the settlement process and said “a lot of work went into this settlement and I want to see it move forward without people trying to attack it.”

Judge Rosenstengel is overseeing what is known as multidistrict litigation (MDL) for paraquat cases. In her orders, she has cited the “broad authority” granted to her by federal rules to facilitate “just, speedy and inexpensive disposition” of actions before her.

Each of the lawsuits alleges that Syngenta failed to warn plaintiffs of evidence that exposure to its paraquat products could cause Parkinson’s disease, an incurable and progressive brain disease that commonly comes with life-threatening complications.

Many cases have been set for trial in courts around the country over the course of the last few years, but none has gone to trial as the company prioritized settling outside of court. (In 2022 and 2023, The New Lede and The Guardian revealed a trove of internal corporate documents showing the company was aware of – and concerned about – science connecting paraquat to Parkinson’s decades ago, but worked to invalidate that research instead of warning users.)

The master settlement, the terms of which have not been made public, has not proven popular with many plaintiffs, some lawyers said, because the financial payouts being offered to individual plaintiffs are low and would leave little compensation after deductions for medical liens and attorney’s fees.

Some attorneys pegged the average payouts around $100,000 or less per plaintiff. Drugwatch, an advocacy and analysis arm of the Wilson Firm, reported that the paraquat settlements “could range from $20,000 to $1.5 million.”

Parkinson’s affects nerve cells in the brain, leading in advanced cases to severe physical debilitation and often dementia. Many Parkinson’s experts say the disease can be caused by a range of factors, including exposure to pesticides such as paraquat, as well as other chemicals.

Syngenta has always maintained that the evidence linking paraquat to Parkinson’s disease is “fragmentary” and “inconclusive.” But numerous scientific studies have found that paraquat damages cells in the brain in ways that can lead to Parkinson’s.

Paraquat was introduced in the 1960s by a predecessor to Syngenta, which is based in Switzerland but is a Chinese-owned entity. Paraquat is commonly used by farmers to control weeds before planting their crops and to dry out crops for harvest. In the United States, the chemical is used in orchards, wheat fields, pastures where livestock graze, cotton fields and elsewhere.

Syngenta said earlier this year it will stop making paraquat.

Last month, the US Supreme Court issued a ruling that limits the claims plaintiffs can make against pesticide companies, which may influence how plaintiffs evaluate settlement offers.