Her testimony interrupted by fighting back tears, one of three plaintiffs suing Monsanto for its weed killer Roundup she claimed caused her to develop non-Hodgkins lymphoma described for a jury her harrowing experience with the disease.
“I’ve been through a lot and I don’t need this (cancer),” Cheryl Davis said during Monday’s session. “It’s not fair that I got it.”
Defense attorneys for Monsanto attempted undermining Davis’ testimony, linking her living close to a smelter in Washington State as a possible cancer cause, being overweight, and called attention to a felony conviction in 1982 they said she had not admitted.
The trial in the 21st Missouri Judicial District Court is being streamed live courtesy of Courtroom View Network.
The suit filed by plaintiffs Marty Cox, Davis and Gary Gentile asks for punitive damages for medical bills, treatments, physical pain and mental anguish. The three have different forms of Non-Hodgkin’s Lymphoma (NHL), a cancer. Cox was diagnosed with B-cell lymphoma, Gentile with high-grade-B-cell lymphoma and Davis with follicular lymphoma. The plaintiffs are in their 60s and 70s.
The case is of interest because Monsanto maintains a headquarters a few miles from the site of the courtroom; additional Missouri lawsuits against the company are pending and could be influenced by the trial's outcome. The hearing is also the first since the U.S. Supreme Court turned back an attempt by Monsanto lawyers to toss out suits in state courts based on federal preemption laws.
Glyphosate was added to a list of hazardous materials in July of 2017 by the Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA). This after the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) determined the substance is an animal, and thus probably a human carcinogen.
However, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has said there are no risks from the chemical to humans when it is used in accordance with its labeling. The EPA enacts laws while the Department of Pesticide Regulation (DPR) oversees enforcement programs.
During Monday’s session, Davis's attorney Erin Wood displayed photos of her residences and the yards in which she used Roundup spray to combat weeds. She currently resides in Steilacoom, Wash. She is the mother of two grown children and works for the state as a psychiatric care giver.
“Did it (Roundup) make contact with your skin?” Wood asked.
“I’m sure it did,” Davis said. “I was wearing shorts and flip-flops (in summer). The nozzle sprayer would leak.”
Davis added that she usually was not wearing gloves during the spraying.
“Did you ever see anything on the Roundup bottle that indicated it was dangerous?”
“No.”
“If you had seen on the bottle there was a risk of cancer?”
“I would never would have bought it,” Davis said.
Davis said she saw a television commercial run by plaintiff attorneys that said Roundup was a potential carcinogen, and she did her own investigation.
“I learned that it could have caused my cancer,” she said.
She said that although she had lived for two years near a smelter in Tacoma, doctors had told her it was not the cause of her cancer.
“They (defense attorneys) also claimed you were obese,” Wood said.
“On the low end,” Davis answered.
“Have any doctors told you you were obese?”
“No.”
She said she was a non-smoker.
Davis was diagnosed with the cancer in 2004 and after treatments and remission had a reoccurrence of the disease in 2011. Wood asked her what her reaction was when the diagnosis was made.
“My husband and daughter started to cry but I put on a brave front and said, what do we do now?” Davis said.
The treatments involved chemotherapy and radiation.
“What were the side effects?” Wood asked.
“I was tired a lot, weakness, nausea, it was stressful. I was scared to death. I wondered what will happen to my daughter? This disease is not curable, it does come back.”
“Are you still living with the side effects today?”
“I can’t do a lot of the things I used do. I played softball, I did aerobics. I quit everything. I’ve always been active.”
Under cross examination, Monsanto attorney Jennifer Saulino asked Davis if she mixed the concentrate form of Roundup before spraying it. Davis answered that her husband did the mixing. Davis agreed that she had also used pre-mixed Roundup ready to be sprayed from a bottle.
“You never read the premix labeling?” Saulino asked.
“No.”
“You were pleased with how it (Roundup) performed?”
“Yes.”
Saulino said as part of the pre-trial Davis was asked to fill out a plaintiff questionnaire. The document asked if she had ever been convicted of a felony. Davis had marked “no” on the sheet.
“It’s not true is it?” Saulino asked.
Davis started to explain and Saulino said, “yes or no?”
“It’s not (true) but with an explanation,” Davis said.
“In 1981 it was for embezzlement of $1,200. You were convicted in a federal court,” Saulino said. “You did not answer correctly.”
“Not true,” Davis responded.
“None of your doctors told you that Roundup caused your cancer,” Saulino said.
“Correct,” Davis agreed.
Davis said she had asked about the cause during questioning in a previous deposition but was told the cause of the cancer was “unknown.”
“You concluded (Roundup was the cause) after seeing it on television (plaintiff lawyer ad)?”
“Yes,” Davis said.
Under redirect questioning, Wood asked Davis why she marked no that she had not been convicted of a felony.
“My parole officer told me it had been stricken from the record,” Davis said. “I had paid back the money ($1,200). I had done my probation with the State of Washington.”
“Did you believe it (questionnaire answer) was accurate?”
“Defintely.”
Saulino, on re-cross examination, said, “You marked no on the form without an explanation, the explanation you provided here today. You believed it wasn’t going to show up. You were in fact arrested.”
“Yes,” Davis said.