Syngenta Corn Seed Lawsuit

Syngenta Litigation

Syngenta was sued by several of the top corn producers in the country for supposedly causing damage to the corn industry in the United States. Syngenta did so by selling a seed of corn known as MIR 162 that had been treated with the pesticide, Agrisure Viptera, which did not have approval for exportation to China, one of three biggest U.S. corn importers.

The farmers that produced the Viptera Corn in the growth season of 2014 were included in the mass tort concerning Syngenta corn as plaintiffs. Other plaintiffs in the mass tort were exporters of corn, brokers, storage facilities, and other entities involved in the corn industry in the United States. The group of plaintiffs make the claim that if they knew that the corn would be rejected by China, they would not have become involved in the purchase, planting, harvesting, or selling of the corn.

Officials in China rejected U.S. corn by the millions of tons until recently because of the fear related to receiving the genetically modified MIR 162 seed of corn, which contains Viptera, a known pesticide. The genetically modified strain of corn was engineered as being protected against such things as corn earworms and black cutworms.

Syngenta Viptera Corn Seed

The Viptera seed was sold by Syngenta to U.S. farmers as early as 2010, as well as being approved the same year in South American countries like Argentina and Brazil. Allegedly unbeknownst to the U.S. farmers, the seed did not gain approval in China, which created one to three billion dollars in losses in 2013-2014 season of harvest. The country of China found the Viptera corn strain in several U.S. shipments in November of 2013. Consequently, the country began rejecting corn imported from the United States in February of 2014. As of October 2015, the country of China had rejected more than 130 million bushels imported from the U.S.

Our Reputation

The Krause & Kinsman Law Firm is made up of some of the nation’s foremost legal minds in the mass-tort field. That’s why our clients & co-counsel partners choose us.

Plaintiffs’ Steering Committee, and Co-Chair of the Law & Briefing Committee in MDL 2846:

In Re: Davol, Inc./C.R. Bard, Inc., Polypropylene Hernia Mesh Products Liability Litigation

Plaintiffs’ Steering Committee in MDL 2974:

In Re: Paragard IUD Products Liability Litigation

Plaintiffs’ Steering Committee in MDL 2924:

In Re: Zantac (Ranitidine) Products Liability Litigation

Along with the aforementioned MDLs,

Plaintiff’s Counsel has prosecuted thousands of cases across other Multi-District Litigations and Mass-Torts, including:

MDL No. 3043:

Acetaminophen ASD/ADHD Product Liability Litigation

MDL No. 2753:

Atrium Medical Corp. C-Qur Mesh Products Liability Litigation

MDL No. 2782:

Ethicon Physiomesh Flexible Composite Hernia Mesh Products Liability Litigation

MCL No. 627:

In Re: Physiomesh Litigation, MCL

MCL No. 633:

In Re: Prolene Hernia System Mesh Litigation

MDL No. 2750:

Cook Medical, Inc., IVC Filters Marketing, Sales Practices and Products Liability Litigation

MDL No. 2641:

Bard IVC Filters Products Liability Litigation

MDL No. 2326:

In Re: Boston Scientific Corp. Pelvic Repair System Products Liability Litigation

MDL No. 2606:

Benicar (Olmesartan) Product Liability Litigation

MDL No. 2666:

In Re: Forced Air Warming Devices Products Liability Litigation

MDL No. 2591:

Syngenta AG MIR162 Corn Litigation

MDL No. 2936:

In Re: Smity’s/CAM2303 Tractor Hydraulic Fluid Marketing, Sales Practices and Products Liability Litigation

MCL No. 630:

In Re: Proceed Mesh Litigation

MDL No. 2543:

In Re: General Motors LLC Ignition Switch Litigation

MDL No. 2004:

In Re: Mentor Corp. ObTape Transobturator Sling Products Liability Litigation

MDL No. 2187:

In Re: C. R. Bard, Inc. Pelvic Repair System Products Liability Litigation

MDL No. 2325:

In Re: American Medical Systems, Inc., Pelvic Repair System Products Liability Litigation

MDL No. 2327:

In Re: Ethicon, Inc., Pelvic Repair System Products Liability Litigation

MDL No. 2387:

In Re: Coloplast Corp. Pelvic Support Systems Products Liability Litigation

MDL No. 251:

In Re: Neomedic Pelvic Repair System Products Liability Litigation

Highly Awarded Trial Attorneys

The Krause & Kinsman Law Firm is one of the nation’s leading mass-tort & personal-injury law firms. The founding partners, Adam & Robert, have been selected to serve on steering committees for some of the largest pharmaceutical mass-tort cases.

Working With Us

Partnering with Krause & Kinsman is easy. When you partner with Krause & Kinsman, you can be sure that our mutual clients’ complex matters are handled with the utmost care and dedication. In addition to our top-notch representation, we will ensure our mutual clients receive frequent communication about the status of their cases.

Partner With Us

Why Us?

Recognized leaders in mass-torts with vast experience in complex litigation.

Your clients will appreciate the high-quality representation provided.

Your clients will consistently real-time updates on the status of their case via video, email, text, and phone.

Get real-time updates on the status of our mutual clients while their cases progress.

Collaborate on the case together and receive co-counsel fees.