Seeger Weiss Roundup Lawsuit: Settlement, Appeal, and Durnell Ruling

The Seeger Weiss Roundup settlement is a proposed $7.25 billion class-action resolution with Monsanto, filed February 17, 2026, in Missouri state court, that would compensate people diagnosed with non-Hodgkin lymphoma after being exposed to Roundup weedkiller. Seeger Weiss LLP is one of six plaintiffs’ firms serving as class counsel in Randall King, et al. v. Monsanto Company, case No. 2622-CC00325, before Judge Timothy J. Boyer of the 22nd Judicial Circuit Court in St. Louis.¹²³

Who Qualifies as a Class Member

The class covers people exposed to Roundup in the United States before February 17, 2026, who have been diagnosed with non-Hodgkin lymphoma or will be later. It splits into two groups. Current claimants already have an NHL diagnosis. Future claimants are people who were exposed before the settlement date and receive an NHL diagnosis within 16 years of final approval.¹

Exposure is defined broadly. It covers people who applied Roundup, purchased it, or were simply in proximity to its use.² One important boundary: people with claims pending in the federal multidistrict litigation in California are generally excluded from the class unless they dismiss those claims.³ Monsanto does not admit liability. Class members can opt out, but Monsanto reserves the right to walk away from the entire deal if too many do.¹

How Much Claimants Can Recover

Awards run on a nine-tier grid built around three variables: whether exposure was occupational or residential, age at diagnosis, and whether the NHL is aggressive or indolent. A younger worker with occupational exposure and aggressive NHL sits at the top, with an average award of $165,000. Anyone diagnosed at age 78 or older falls into a single bottom tier averaging $10,000, regardless of exposure type or cancer subtype.³

Within a tier, the actual check varies. Each claimant receives between 80% and 120% of the tier average based on an individual Claim Score. That score weighs the intensity of medical treatment, the strength of exposure documentation, the duration and frequency of exposure, and medical history such as prior blood disorders.³ Supplemental funds are available for people with extraordinary circumstances or extraordinary residential exposure.²

Two shortcuts exist for people who want money sooner or who can’t meet the standard proof. Claimants in tiers five through nine who had already sued or signed a tolling agreement before February 13, 2026, can take a “quick-pay” fixed payment between $6,000 and $14,500. Those payments can begin even before final approval, drawn from a $300 million pool set aside for that purpose.³ Claimants who cannot show at least 16 hours or 10 lifetime days of exposure receive a flat $150.⁴

Payout Timing and Deadlines

Monsanto would pay the fund out on a declining, capped annual schedule stretching up to 21 years, with nearly $3 billion due in the first five.² Individual filing windows depend on when someone is diagnosed. Claimants with an existing NHL diagnosis have 180 days to register for benefits and must file a claim within 180 days after any appeals are resolved. Future claimants have up to six years from their diagnosis to file.⁵

The opt-out and objection deadline was June 4, 2026, and the final fairness hearing before Judge Boyer was scheduled for July 9, 2026.⁵

Seeger Weiss’s Role and the Class Counsel Team

Seeger Weiss LLP was founded in 1999 by Christopher A. Seeger and Stephen A. Weiss and is headquartered in Ridgefield Park, New Jersey, with additional offices in New York, Pennsylvania, and Florida. It has more than 40 attorneys and a long track record in mass-tort work.⁶

The firm is one of six designated class counsel firms in the Roundup deal. The others are Motley Rice LLC, Waters Kraus Paul & Siegel, The Holland Law Firm, Ketchmark & McCreight, and Williams Hart & Boundas. Together they negotiated the agreement and filed it in Missouri state court.¹ Class counsel have asked the court for $675 million in attorney fees, a figure they described as consistent with benchmarks for settlements of this size.⁷

Why the Settlement Is Contested

The deal drew opposition from several directions before its June 4 objection deadline. More than 100 class members and a dozen health care plans filed formal objections, raising concerns about inadequate notice, a cumbersome opt-out process, and jurisdictional issues.⁸ Attorneys for 13 cancer patients alleged the deal was a product of “collusion” between Bayer and class counsel and called the $675 million fee request excessive. Others argued that a Missouri state court lacks authority to bind citizens of other states.⁹

A sharp split runs through the plaintiffs’ bar itself. The co-lead counsel in the federal Roundup MDL, Robin L. Greenwald of Weitz & Luxenberg and David J. Dickens of The Miller Firm, said they were not consulted about the settlement and filed a joint motion opposing it. They noted that none of the six class counsel firms “played a significant role” in the MDL, where the bulk of the litigation had been consolidated for years.¹⁰ Weitz & Luxenberg, which represents about 2,000 Roundup clients, announced it would file formal objections.⁹

Federal Judge Vince Chhabria, who oversees the Roundup MDL in the Northern District of California, expressed “grave concerns” about the settlement’s legality and what he called its fast-track approval process in state court.⁹ Attorney Gerson Smoger called the opt-out procedures “draconian” and said the compensation grid averaging $10,000 to $165,000 paled against jury verdicts that have reached into the billions.¹¹ Chris Seeger dismissed the removal efforts as a “baseless delay tactic” and said the deal offers guaranteed compensation amid uncertainty at the Supreme Court.

Removal, Remand, and the Pending Appeal

Judge Boyer granted preliminary approval on March 4, 2026.¹²⁹¹³¹¹ Whether the July 9 fairness hearing proceeds on schedule depends on how that appeal is resolved.

How the Supreme Court’s Durnell Ruling Changes the Calculus

Anyone weighing whether to stay in the class or opt out has to reckon with a separate case that ran alongside the settlement. On January 16, 2026, the U.S. Supreme Court agreed to hear Monsanto Co. v. Durnell (No. 24-1068), which asked whether the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act preempts state-law failure-to-warn claims when the EPA has not required a cancer warning on Roundup’s label.¹⁴

On June 25, 2026, the Court ruled 7–2 for Monsanto, holding that FIFRA expressly preempts state-law failure-to-warn claims that would require a cancer warning the EPA has not mandated. The majority relied on the statute’s preemption clause, which bars states from imposing labeling requirements “in addition to or different from” federal standards, and drew a parallel to the 2008 ruling in Riegel v. Medtronic.¹⁵ The decision reversed the Missouri Court of Appeals and effectively cut off warning-based Roundup claims going forward, which Bayer said should “significantly contain” the litigation.¹⁶

For a claimant, the practical effect is that opting out to sue individually is now a much narrower path. Class counsel and Bayer have described the settlement and the ruling as “mutually reinforcing”: the settlement offers a defined payout to those who take it, while Durnell forecloses failure-to-warn theories for those who don’t.¹

What to Do If You Think You Have a Claim

If you were exposed to Roundup before February 17, 2026, and have been diagnosed with non-Hodgkin lymphoma, check first whether you are already part of the federal MDL in California, because MDL claimants are generally excluded unless they dismiss those claims.³ Otherwise, registration windows begin running from final approval, and existing claimants have 180 days from that point to register.⁵

Where you land on the compensation grid depends on documentation you can start gathering now: proof of exposure (work records, purchase records, application logs), medical records showing diagnosis and treatment intensity, and any evidence of duration and frequency of Roundup use. If you had already sued or signed a tolling agreement before February 13, 2026, and fall into tiers five through nine, the quick-pay option can produce a fixed payment between $6,000 and $14,500 before final approval.³ Future claimants have up to six years from diagnosis to file, so a Roundup-exposed person without a current diagnosis has time on their side if a diagnosis later arrives within the 16-year window.⁵

1
Bayer. Monsanto Announces Roundup Class Settlement Agreement to Resolve Current and Future Claims
2
Seeger Weiss LLP. $7.25 Billion Nationwide Roundup Glyphosate Class Action Settlement
3
WeedKillerClass.com. Settlement Class Notice
4
The Hill. $7.25B Settlement Over Roundup Weed Killers: Who Qualifies and How Much You Could Receive
5
WeedKillerClass.com. Weed Killer Class Settlement
6
Seeger Weiss LLP. About Seeger Weiss
7
The New Lede. Bayer Roundup Settlement Lawyer Fees
8
Law.com. 100 Objectors Flag Faults in $7.25B Roundup Settlement
9
Reuters. Bayer’s $7.25 Billion Roundup Settlement Faces Court Objections
10
The New Lede. Joint Motion Against Roundup Class Action
11
The New Lede. Battle Over $7.25 Billion Roundup Settlement Takes a New Turn
12
Bayer. Missouri Court Grants Preliminary Approval of Roundup Class Settlement
13
Reuters. Federal Judge Sends Bayer’s $7.25 Billion Roundup Settlement Back to Missouri State
14
Bayer. Managing the Roundup Litigation
15
Supreme Court of the United States. Monsanto Co. v. Durnell, 609 U.S. ___ (2026)
16
Fierce Pharma. Bayer Scores Major Win as SCOTUS Overturns Roundup Verdict