EAST ST. LOUIS – Chief U.S. District Judge Nancy Rosenstengel dismissed 47 suits blaming weed killer paraquat for Parkinson’s disease on Oct. 6 for failure to state basic facts.
She enforced an order requiring every plaintiff to answer a questionnaire relating to exposure within 30 days of suing.
This group missed the deadline and ignored notices from defendants Syngenta and Chevron.
Rosenstengel presides over paraquat claims from many states by appointment of a judicial panel that consolidated cases and assigned them to her in 2021.
The panel counted 4,752 active cases as of Sept. 15, meaning this group constituted almost exactly 1% of the docket.
Tor Hoerman of Edwardsville represents two among the 47, John Shaffer and Jacob Kieffaber.
Hoerman filed their complaints last December.
He claimed Shaffer was exposed to paraquat sold and used in Georgia.
He added that Shaffer purchased it for the purpose of controlling weeds, primarily for personal, family, or household purposes.
Hoerman claimed Kieffaber’s disease was caused by paraquat exposure while working for Patterson Landscape in Shasta Lake, California.
He devoted the bulk of their complaints to histories of defendants and paraquat.
Answers to questionnaires would have produced more exposure information.
Defendants sent Hoerman overdue notices for Shaffer in January and for Kieffaber in February.
Defendants sent second notices, which Rosenstengel did not require, in March.
A week passed and they asked special master Randi Ellis for review.
In July, Ellis recommended dismissing Hoerman’s clients and 45 others.
The Pulaski Kherkher firm of Houston represented 27, Nachawati Law Group of Dallas represented ten, and the Miller firm in Virginia represented eight.
Miller client Robert Perry returned a questionnaire 10 days later and filed the only objection to Ellis’s recommendation.
Rosenstengel threw his claim out with the rest, finding he failed to articulate a reason that justified his delay.
More dismissals are expected before Rosenstengel starts holding trials.
In May, she directed the parties to confer regarding cases that presented theories of proof so implausible that good faith demanded voluntary dismissal.
She entered the order after two of six plaintiffs she selected for trials voluntarily dismissed their claims with prejudice.
James Onder of St. Louis County represented one.
Gibbs Henderson of Dallas represented the other.
Rosenstengel directed the parties to submit cases in four categories.
One category would include plaintiffs who have no information concerning exposure to paraquat as opposed to another product.
One would include plaintiffs who have no medical evidence for Parkinson’s disease.
One would include plaintiffs claiming to use paraquat in a form in which it never existed such as powder or pellets.
One would include cases like the two trial plaintiffs that dismissed their claims.
The nature of the collapse of those suits remains off record.
Rosenstengel hadn’t received the list as of Oct. 6.
She plans to set six jury trials to shape settlement negotiations.
Rosenstengel originally planned to start the first trial this month, but she vacated the setting at a hearing in August.
She announced her decision after four days of argument over experts and their testimonies.
Baltimore injury firm Miller and Zois posted an assessment of the argument on Oct. 2.
“The fact that Judge Rosenstengel is taking so much time on this is somewhat concerning for the plaintiffs,” they wrote.
“It suggests that she is seriously considering a ruling that would exclude the plaintiffs’ experts and basically end the paraquat class action multi district litigation,” they added.
They described cancellation of the trial as a significant setback for plaintiffs.