In the United States, thousands of people have filed lawsuits against Monsanto alleging exposure to Roundup weed killer caused them to develop non-Hodgkin lymphoma. While the litigation has been pending for years, many people have questions regarding what the litigation is about.
On this Roundup cancer lawsuit FAQ page, we answer some of the most commonly asked questions pertaining to the Roundup litigation against Monsanto. If after reading this, you still have questions about the litigation or about filing a Roundup cancer lawsuit, please contact the law firm of Baum, Hedlund, Aristei & Goldman or call 800-827-0087.
Our firm offers free, no-hassle, no-obligation case evaluations for anyone who was diagnosed with non-Hodgkin lymphoma after being exposed to Roundup. We will answer any questions you may have and help you decide if filing a lawsuit against Monsanto is the right course of action for you and your family.
Does Roundup Cause Cancer?
Yes, and Monsanto has known about the link between Roundup and cancer for decades.
In 2015, the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), the cancer research arm of the World Health Organization, classified glyphosate as a “probable human carcinogen.” Glyphosate is the active ingredient in Monsanto’s Roundup.
IARC, widely considered the gold standard in the field of cancer research, analyzed all published, peer-reviewed data to come to this conclusion. Per the report, the cancer most associated with glyphosate exposure is non-Hodgkin lymphoma.
The link between Roundup and cancer is not just about glyphosate. Roundup is made up of other ingredients that are toxic in and of themselves, and they also work synergistically to increase the toxicity of glyphosate. Monsanto has known this for many years but still refuses to study the link between cancer and the formulated Roundup product people actually use.
According to Monsanto executive, Stephen Adams, “[w]ith regards to the carcinogenicity of our formulations we don’t have such testing on them directly…”
Dr. Mark Martens, a Monsanto scientist, noted in 2001, “I don’t know for sure how suppliers would react – but if somebody came to me and said they wanted to test Roundup I know how I would react – with serious concern.”
In 1999, Monsanto hired Dr. James M. Parry, a professor at the University of Wales, to conduct an internal (and secret) safety review of glyphosate and the formulated product. Monsanto decided to do this, in part, because a 1998 study found that glyphosate produces oxidative stress and genotoxicity (a destructive effect on genetic material) in animals.
Dr. Parry recommended that Monsanto conduct studies on the Roundup formulated product (glyphosate plus surfactant) because there was “[n]o adequate in vitro clastogenicity data available for glyphosate formulations.” A clastogen is an agent that can induce genetic mutation by disrupting or damaging chromosomes. Cells become cancer cells largely because of mutations in their genes.
In his review, Dr. Parry concluded that glyphosate is capable of producing genotoxicity both in vivo and in vitro by a mechanism based upon the production of oxidative damage. Oxidative damage to DNA can lead to cancer.
After reviewing the data, Dr. Parry asked Monsanto to conduct studies to see if there was a synergistic effect with regard to glyphosate and the surfactant, to actually see if the Roundup product people use was genotoxic to humans.
In this email, Monsanto executive William Heydens states: “We simply aren’t going to do the studies Parry suggests.” Roughly 20 years later, Monsanto still has not performed the studies Dr. Parry asked for. This was one of the most important issues for the jury in the Johnson case – Monsanto has never tested the carcinogenicity of the Roundup formulated product, and never turned over Dr. Parry’s report to the EPA or shared the report with anybody.
Need more convincing? Take a look at these studies:
Genotoxic activity of glyphosate and its technical formulation Roundup
Systematic review and meta-analysis of glyphosate exposure and risk of lymphohematopoietic cancers
Integrative assessment of multiple pesticides as risk factors for non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma among men
Does exposure to glyphosate lead to an increase in the micronuclei frequency? A systematic and meta-analytic review
Exposure to pesticides as risk factor for non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma and hairy cell leukemia: pooled analysis of two Swedish case-control studies
Genotoxicity and oxidative stress induced by pesticide exposure in bovine lymphocyte cultures in vitro
Non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma and specific pesticide exposures in men: cross-Canada study of pesticides and health
P-Postlabeling detection of DNA adducts in mice treated with the herbicide Roundup
Genotoxicity testing of the herbicide Roundup and its active ingredient glyphosate isopropylamine using the mouse bone marrow micronucleus test, Salmonella mutagenicity test, and Allium anaphase-telophase test
Non-Hodgkin lymphoma and occupational exposure to agricultural pesticide chemical groups and active ingredients: a systematic review and meta-analysis
How Do I Know if I Got Cancer from Roundup?
According to a 2008 study on thelink between herbicides and cancer, exposure of 10 or more days use in a year to Roundup can potentially double a person’s risk of developing non-Hodgkin lymphoma. Likewise, according to a 2001 study, use of Roundup more than 10 hours over more than 2 days in a year can double the risk of NHL. Therefore, even people who used Roundup around their home may have been exposed enough for Roundup to play a significant role in their cancer.
Is Roundup a Carcinogen?
The International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), one of the foremost cancer research authorities in the world, classified glyphosate, the active ingredient in Roundup, as a “probable human carcinogen.”
IARC Monograph 112 further concluded that the cancer most associated with glyphosate exposure is non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL). Additionally, IARC found strong evidence that glyphosate and commercial formulations can be genotoxic and produce oxidative damage.
According to the California Environmental Protection Agency’s Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA), glyphosate is a chemical known to the state of California to cause cancer and should be labeled as such under the terms of Proposition 65.
What are the Side Effects of Roundup?
In addition to non-Hodgkin lymphoma, exposure to Roundup weed killer has been linked to the following:
- Birth Defects
- Brain Cancer
- Breast Cancer
- Celiac Disease
- Chronic Kidney Disease
- Gluten Intolerance
- Heart Disease
- Inflammatory Bowel Disease
- Liver disease
- Lou Gehrig’s Disease (ALS)
- Multiple Sclerosis
- Parkinson’s Disease
- Reproductive Issues
- Respiratory Illness
Are Glyphosate and Roundup the Same Thing?
Glyphosate is the active ingredient in Roundup. The Roundup formulated product sold to consumers is glyphosate plus other ingredients like surfactants, which increase the absorption of glyphosate on the leaves of plants and in human skin. Monsanto is well aware of this fact, as evidenced by a company report from 2001:
“Surfactants are able to increase glyphosate absorption through the skin by (1) removal of lipids (sebum) from the epidermal surface due to surfactant action, (2) increase of the hydration state of the skin (under closed exposure conditions), (3) increase of skin contact (spreading of water droplets by surfactant action), (4) increase of contact time with the skin due to decrease of evaporation of water from the droplets containing surfactant (surfactant monolayer at surface of droplets slows down passage to vapour phase, (5) increase of sub epidermal blood flow due to irritant action of surfactant, (6) intra-epidermal and sub epidermal intercellular water accumulation due to the irritant action of the surfactant.”
The Roundup formulated product you use has not been studied as much as glyphosate. In fact, internal Monsanto emails we obtained in the discovery phase of litigation show that Monsanto has not conducted any carcinogenicity studies on the Roundup formulated product.
In one email exchange, Monsanto executive Richard Garnett noted that studying the Roundup formulation “was not likely to help us.” Another Monsanto executive noted in the same email chain that after abandoning this kind of scientific inquiry, “[w]e are left behind with too many questions…”
“…the formulated product (and thus the surfactant) does the damage.” – Dr. William Heydens, Monsanto Executive
Is Roundup More Toxic than Glyphosate?
Yes. According to a U.S. National Toxicology Program (NTP) spokesperson, Roundup “is much more toxic” than glyphosate in isolation.
This question is arguably more important than the toxicity of glyphosate because the formulated Roundup product is what people, animals and the environment are actually exposed to. Industry testing underlying the regulatory authorizations for Roundup have always been conducted on glyphosate by itself, even though the Roundup product contains other ingredients called surfactants and adjuvants.
According to various studies, other ingredients in Roundup may increase the toxicity of glyphosate by enabling the chemical to become more bioavailable and penetrate plant and animal cells with greater ease than glyphosate alone.
Monsanto is acutely aware of this. According to internal company documents from 2003, a top company scientist said:
“You cannot say that Roundup is not a carcinogen … we have not done the necessary testing on the formulation to make that statement.”
– Donna Farmer, Monsanto
In May of 2018, the National Toxicology Program (NTP) issued a preliminary report on its evaluation of glyphosate formulations. According to Mike DeVito, acting chief of the NTP Laboratory, “[w]e see the formulations are much more toxic. The formulations were killing the cells.”
How Much Glyphosate is in Roundup?
The following list details the percentage of glyphosate in specific Roundup products:
Roundup QuikPRO is 73.3% glyphosate
Roundup Custom is 53.8% glyphosate
Roundup PRO Concentrate is 50.2% glyphosate
Roundup Weed & Grass Killer Super Concentrate is 50.2% glyphosate
Roundup ProMAX is 48.7% glyphosate
Roundup Original is 41% glyphosate
Roundup Max Control 365 Concentrate is 18% glyphosate
Roundup Poison Ivy Concentrate Plus is 18% glyphosate
Roundup Weed & Grass Killer Concentrate Plus is 18% glyphosate
Roundup Extended Control Concentrate is 18% glyphosate
Roundup Ready-to-Use Weed & Grass Killer is 2% glyphosate
Roundup Precision Gel is 1% glyphosate
Roundup Extended Control is 1% glyphosate
Roundup Ready-to-Use Poison Ivy is 1% glyphosate
What Products Contain Glyphosate?
- Fallow Master®
- RT 3®
Cenex / Land O’Lakes:
- Hoss Ultra®
- Mad Dog®
What does EPA Say about Glyphosate?
In 1985, the eight members of U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) toxicology branch signed a consensus review classifying glyphosate as a possible carcinogen based on studies that showed tumor growth among rodents treated with glyphosate. According to the EPA scientists who reviewed the studies, glyphosate appeared to cause testicular tumors in male rats, thyroid tumors in female rats and a rare form of kidney tumor in mice.
The mice finding was what led EPA to classify glyphosate as a “possible” carcinogen. At the time of this classification, Roundup had already been on the market for over a decade.
However, documents obtained via Freedom of Information Act requests by Carey Gillam from U.S. Right to Know (USRTK) show that a Monsanto manager responded to the EPA’s glyphosate classification by arranging for the kidney tumor slides to be reexamined by an academic pathologist — a man who could “persuade the agency that the observed tumors are not related to glyphosate.”
The pathologist did exactly that and found a tumor among the control mice that nobody else (including the EPA scientists) could find, which effectively called into question the scientific conclusions gleaned from the tumors among the mice treated with glyphosate.
Monsanto argued that in lieu of the single observed control group tumor, it should be given another opportunity to test glyphosate. But when the agency asked Monsanto to repeat the rodent study (it was, in fact, Monsanto’s study to begin with), Monsanto declined. (A “control group” is the group in an experiment or clinical trial that does not receive the same treatment as the experiment group(s).)
In the end, Monsanto’s stonewalling and influence allowed glyphosate to be downgraded from a Group C carcinogen (“possibly” carcinogenic to humans) in 1985 to a Group D carcinogen (“not classifiable as to human carcinogenicity”) in 1986. The EPA reviewed the data on glyphosate again in 1991 and downgraded the chemical yet again to Group E (“evidence of noncarcinogenicity in humans”).
Not all of the EPA scientists on the 1991 panel agreed with the conclusion. In fact, two of the scientists would not even sign the paper that classified glyphosate to Group E.
After six years of pressure from Monsanto to change the EPA’s glyphosate classification from possible carcinogen to no evidence of carcinogenicity, the agency has stuck with the Group E classification ever since.
Which Glyphosate Assessment is More Reliable: EPA or IARC?
IARC is widely considered the worldwide gold standard in the field of cancer research. As an independent agency, its sole mission is human health.
Seventeen world-renowned scholars came to a unanimous determination on glyphosate in IARC’s 2015 Monograph. Dr. Aaron Blair, who only recently retired from the U.S. National Cancer Institute after a career spanning decades, led the IARC Working Group in drafting the glyphosate Monograph.
IARC’s glyphosate Monograph is up-to-date. After reviewing all relevant and available research, the Working Group considered a broad range of evidence, including human epidemiology and other peer-reviewed studies.
The EPA’s last assessment of glyphosate was conducted in 1993, though the agency is expected to release a new report on glyphosate sometime in 2019. In its 1993 assessment, the EPA relied almost entirely on industry-funded studies and did not analyze epidemiological data.
While the EPA is also charged with protecting human health, the agency’s ties to Monsanto have become a cause for concern. A trove of documents that are now a part of The Monsanto Papers show that EPA officials may have colluded with Monsanto to quash another U.S. agency’s review of glyphosate. According to the documents, Monsanto was worried about the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR) becoming “a domestic IARC…” with its review of glyphosate.
“I think it’s very clear… that EPA officials and Monsanto employees worked together to accomplish a goal of stopping that analysis at ATSDR. That is collusion. I don’t know what else you’d call that,” says Baum, Hedlund, Aristei & Goldman attorney R. Brent Wisner.
Who Can File a Roundup Lawsuit against Monsanto?
Our firm is representing a wide range of individuals who were diagnosed with non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) after using Roundup. Most of our clients are individuals who sprayed Roundup around their home or business. We also represent government workers, farmers, agricultural workers, gardeners, landscapers and others.
Anyone diagnosed with non-Hodgkin lymphoma after using Roundup for their occupation or on their property (i.e. home and garden use) should consider speaking with a Roundup cancer attorney about filing a claim. Thousands of individuals from all walks of life and from all across America have filed Roundup cancer lawsuits against Monsanto with more and more people joining the litigation each day.
Why are People Suing Monsanto over Roundup?
For years, Monsanto has claimed (and continues to claim) that Roundup is safe. However, numerous studies have found statistically significant links between Roundup and a host of serious health issues, including cancer. Even Monsanto’s own studies on Roundup and its active ingredient, glyphosate, have shown that Roundup is not as safe as Monsanto claims.
In 2015, the World Health Organization’s International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), one of the foremost cancer research authorities in the world, classified the active ingredient in Roundup (glyphosate) as a probable human carcinogen. The IARC report further concluded that the cancer most associated with exposure to glyphosate is non-Hodgkin lymphoma.
The Roundup cancer litigation seeks to hold Monsanto accountable for failing to warn the public about the link between Roundup exposure and cancer. Monsanto has known for decades about the link between Roundup and cancer, but has continued to market its product as safe, putting profit over human safety.
Have There Been Any Monsanto Settlements or Verdicts?
Monsanto has not settled any cases related to Roundup. However, a jury in California awarded over $289 million to a Bay Area man who sued Monsanto after developing non-Hodgkin lymphoma.
$289.2 Million Awarded to Former Groundskeeper with Terminal Cancer
On Aug. 10, 2018, a San Francisco jury returned a verdict in the case of a former groundskeeper with terminal cancer, ordering Monsanto to pay $39.2 million in compensatory damages and $250 million in punitive damages for failing to warn consumers that exposure to Roundup causes cancer.
Dewayne “Lee” Johnson filed a Roundup cancer lawsuit on Jan. 28, 2016, alleging the Roundup he sprayed while working as a groundskeeper for the Benicia Unified School District caused him to develop non-Hodgkin lymphoma.
After five weeks of trial proceedings, the jury found unanimously that Roundup caused Mr. Johnson to develop NHL, and that Monsanto failed to warn of this severe health hazard. The jury also found that Monsanto should be punished for acting with malice, oppression or fraud.
The law firm of Baum, Hedlund, Aristei & Goldman was proud to represent Mr. Johnson at trial.
Will the Johnson Verdict Ban Roundup in California?
Only a governmental entity can ban a chemical. The purpose of the Johnson case and others like it is to hold Monsanto accountable for failing to warn that Roundup can cause cancer and to compensate individuals for the damages (cancer) caused by Roundup use.
An outright ban is not likely in the short term, although some communities have banned Roundup. Glyphosate will be labeled as a chemical known to the state to cause cancer in accordance with Prop 65. Glyphosate is the active ingredient in Roundup.
What are the Monsanto Papers?
The Monsanto Papers are a collection of internal Monsanto documents unearthed during the discovery phase of the federal Monsanto Roundup litigation. The documents consist of internal Monsanto emails, text messages, reports, reviews, studies, and other memoranda.
A judge overseeing the federal Monsanto Roundup litigation declassified the first batch of documents and published them on the website of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California on March 14 and 15, 2017. Baum Hedlnd Aristei & Goldman released the second batch of Monsanto secret documents on August 1, 2017. More documents are expected to be released as the litigation progresses.
The Monsanto Papers tell an alarming story of ghostwriting, scientific manipulation, collusion with the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and previously undisclosed information about how the human body absorbs glyphosate. These documents provide a deeper understanding of the serious public health consequences associated with Monsanto’s conduct in marketing Roundup.
Some key revelations in the Monsanto Papers:
- Monsanto hardly tested the toxicity of the Roundup formulated product.
- Monsanto actively avoided conducting studies on glyphosate and the Roundup formulation that might cast doubt as to the safety of its products.
- Monsanto ghostwrote studies that were supposed to be conducted by independent scientists.
- Monsanto implemented a PR strategy to attack scientists who called into question the safety of its products.
As a Farmer, I Depend on Roundup and Use it Regularly. Are Lawyers Trying to Get Rid of Roundup?
The Roundup cancer litigation is not about getting rid of Roundup; it is about Monsanto’s failure to warn people that exposure to Roundup can lead to cancer, something Monsanto has known for decades.
Monsanto should warn consumers about the cancer link so that people have the opportunity to know what they are consuming and at what cost. Instead, Monsanto continues to tout Roundup as safe and attacks scientists or anyone else who says anything to the contrary. Meanwhile, many men, women, and children exposed to Roundup are getting sick.
In essence, this litigation is about Monsanto being held to account for depriving consumers of information needed to make an educated decision on whether or not to purchase and use a product that can cause harm. Monsanto has robbed them of this choice.
If Monsanto had put a warning label on Roundup when it first learned of the cancer link, there would not be any litigation to speak of.
Monsanto continues to keep consumers in the dark about the dangers surrounding Roundup. Our firm will continue to fight for and on behalf of consumers to bring those dangers to light and hold Monsanto accountable for failing to warn.
I am Not the Type to Sue Anyone. Why Should I File a Lawsuit against Monsanto?
If you or a loved one were diagnosed with non-Hodgkin lymphoma after being exposed to Roundup, you or your loved one could be looking at a serious financial strain due to lost wages and expensive medical care. This financial burden might not exist had Monsanto properly warned you and other consumers about the dangers associated with Roundup. Our firm believes Monsanto is responsible for any damages stemming from its failure to warn consumers about the link between Roundup and cancer, and we intend to hold the company accountable.
Even if you are not the suing type, it is unfair for you or your loved one to shoulder the costs from any injuries sustained due to Monsanto’s failure to warn. Our clients say similar things regarding their use of Roundup—if they had known that Roundup was linked to cancer, they never would have used it.
“I have spent more than 50 years as a farmer because I love the soil and growing food for California consumers. I never thought the price I’d pay would be blood cancer. I wish somebody had warned me.” – John Barton is a native of Bakersfield, California and a third-generation farmer who used Roundup for years.
“My husband, Dean, was an athlete, a seventh degree black belt, a noted actor and theatre director schooled in Shakespeare and ancient mythology. He was a wise man. If he knew that a weed killer could have killed him and left his wife struggling to survive after providing for the two of them, he would have lived with the weeds.” – Deborah Brooks, who lost her husband to cancer in 2016.
“I would’ve never sprayed that product on school grounds … if I knew it would cause harm … It’s unethical.” Dewayne “Lee” Johnson, former pest control manager for Benicia Unified School District in Northern California
Filing a Roundup cancer lawsuit is your best recourse for holding Monsanto accountable for its malfeasance and for obtaining financial compensation to cover the cost of medical care and loss of income. It is also the clearest message one can send to Monsanto and other corporations that choose to put profits over human health: If you fail to inform the public about the dangers associated with a product, you will be brought to justice.
If I File a Lawsuit, am I Joining a Class Action?
No, the individual lawsuits against Monsanto over the link to non-Hodgkin lymphoma are not part of a class action. The individual Roundup cancer lawsuits seek remedy for injuries (non-Hodgkin lymphoma) sustained as a result of being exposed to Roundup and its active ingredient, glyphosate.
Roundup class actions against Monsanto are related to allegations of false and misleading information on the Roundup label and don’t involve personal injury or wrongful death claims. According to the class actions, Monsanto continues to mislead consumers by representing glyphosate, the active ingredient in Roundup, as targeting an enzyme that is “found in plants but not in people or pets.”
The class actions (filed in multiple states) allege the enzyme that glyphosate targets exists in people and pets. Per the class actions:
“Glyphosate functions as a biocide by inhibiting the enzyme 5-enolpyruvylshikimate-3-phosphate (“EPSP”) synthase, disrupting the fifth of six enzymatic steps in the shikimate pathway, which processes aromatic amino acids in certain organisms. Although humans and other mammals themselves do not have a shikimate pathway, the shikimate pathway is present in bacteria, including beneficial bacteria that inhabit the mammalian gut and are essential to overall health. EPSP is therefore “found in . . . people [and] pets. Just like it inhibits EPSP synthase in weeds, the active ingredient in Roundup inhibits EPSP synthase in these human and pet gut bacteria, and just like it targets weeds, the active ingredient in Roundup targets the human and pet gut bacteria.”
What Amount of Money Can I Expect from a Roundup Cancer Lawsuit?
On Aug. 10, 2018, a San Francisco, California jury awarded $289.2 million to Dewayne “Lee” Johnson in the first Roundup cancer lawsuit to proceed to trial. The jury verdict included $39.2 million for compensatory damages and $250 million in punitive damages.
Claims for damages and future verdicts and settlements in each Roundup lawsuit will vary in accordance with each individual situation and the rules of the court where a particular case is filed. These are some of the most common damages pursued by claimants:
- Medical Expenses
- Lost Wages or Income
- Reduced Earning Capacity
- Personal Injury
- Pain and Suffering
- Wrongful Death (if a loved one passed away from NHL)
Is There a Time Limit for Filing a Roundup Cancer Lawsuit?
Yes, product liability claims are governed by statutes of limitations, which vary from state to state. If you would like to learn more about your state’s statute of limitations, please contact us today or call for a free case evaluation.
How Much Does it Cost to Hire a Roundup Cancer Attorney?
It costs you nothing up front if you retain the law firm of Baum, Hedlund, Aristei & Goldman to represent you in your Roundup cancer lawsuit. Our firm works for you on a contingent fee basis, which means we only receive a percentage of the amount we recover on your behalf in a Monsanto settlement or verdict. We advance all the costs which are reimbursed to us from the client’s portion of any settlement or verdict. Costs are typically spread out amongst the hundreds of clients we represent.
How Do I Know if Baum Hedlund is the Right Law Firm to Handle my Lawsuit against Monsanto?
Baum, Hedlund, Aristei & Goldman attorney R. Brent Wisner served as co-lead trial lawyer in the case of Dewayne “Lee” Johnson v. Monsanto Company, which resulted in a $289.2 million verdict for Mr. Johnson. Working together with Robert F. Kennedy Jr., our Roundup litigation team is a leading voice in the fight against Monsanto with a track record of success.
We are a national law firm that has handled thousands of cases and recovered over $1.9 billion on behalf of our clients in all areas of practice. Nearly 1,000 people from across the nation have entrusted us to represent them in the Roundup cancer litigation (with that number increasing every day) making us one of the nation’s leading firms in the fight against Monsanto.
Our firm and a handful of other firms in the Roundup litigation were instrumental in declassifying and making public numerous internal Monsanto documents now known as The Monsanto Papers.
The media continues to recognize our firm as a leader in the Roundup litigation. Baum Hedlund partner Brent Wisner, who is part of the leadership in the California state court cases against Monsanto, senior partner Michael Baum, who is a member of the executive committee in the federal litigation against Monsanto, and Pedram Esfandiary, another lawyer handling our Roundup cases, have been interviewed by some of the biggest media outlets in the world, including the Wall Street Journal, New York Times, Bloomberg, Deutsche Welle, EURACTIV, Europe 1, The Huffington Post, and many others. They have also appeared on radio and television in the U.S. and in Europe.
These three attorneys have also testified or presented evidence of Monsanto’s malfeasance to governmental bodies in California and before the EU Parliament.
The search for an attorney that you can trust, who can serve your needs, and with whom you feel comfortable can be an arduous task. Rest assured that if you give us the opportunity to represent your interests, we will do everything possible to secure maximum compensation for you and your family, and ensure that other people do not have to experience the pain and suffering that brought about your claim. But don’t to take our word for it – see what our past clients have to say about us:
“I strongly recommend this firm based on my experience in working with them during a very difficult time. They genuinely care about their clients and it shows throughout the firm. Each person that I encountered while dealing with this firm, continuously showed their professionalism and caring attitude. When you are grieving the loss of someone you love, it is comforting to know that you have people who understand your pain, help you through a difficult process and keep you informed. They make sure that you understand the process and are always there to answer your questions. Baum, Hedlund, Aristei & Goldman is definitely “The Best!” – Deborah Adams
See More Client Reviews