From our private database of 47,400+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

Monsanto Company v. Durnell

United States Supreme Court
146 S. Ct. 2001 (2026)

Written by Angela Patrick, JD

Facts

Roundup was a glyphosate-based herbicide made by Monsanto Company (defendant). Farmer John Durnell (plaintiff) used Roundup for 20 years before developing cancer. Durnell believed that his repeated exposure to the glyphosate in Roundup had caused his cancer. Durnell sued Monsanto in Missouri state court for the tort of failure to warn, contending that Roundup’s label should have included a cancer warning. Monsanto argued that this state-law failure-to-warn claim was preempted by the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA). Monsanto presented evidence that it first registered Roundup with the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in 1991. At that time, the EPA determined that glyphosate did not cause cancer in humans and approved Roundup and its label without a cancer warning. Over the next 30 years, the EPA reviewed glyphosate four more times, concluding each time that it did not present a cancer concern. The EPA never approved a Roundup label containing a cancer warning. The trial court ruled that FIFRA’s labeling requirements did not preempt Durnell’s Missouri failure-to-warn claim, and the jury awarded Durnell $1.25 million. The Missouri Court of Appeals affirmed. The Missouri Supreme Court declined review. However, because courts were divided over whether FIFRA preempted Roundup-related claims, the United States Supreme Court granted certiorari.

Rule of Law

The rule of law is the black letter law upon which the court rested its decision. To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Issue

The issue section includes the dispositive legal issue in the case phrased as a question. To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Holding and Reasoning (Kavanaugh, J.)

The holding and reasoning section includes:

A "yes" or "no" answer to the question framed in the issue section;
A summary of the majority or plurality opinion, using the CREAC method; and
The procedural disposition (e.g., reversed and remanded, affirmed, etc.).

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Concurrence (Thomas, J.)

The concurrence section is for members only and includes a summary of the concurring judge or justice’s opinion. To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Dissent (Jackson, J.)

The dissent section is for members only and includes a summary of the dissenting judge or justice’s opinion. To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

What to do next…

Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.
You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 954,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.
Unlock this case brief Read our student testimonials
Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.
Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.
Learn about our approach Read more about Quimbee

Here's why 954,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 47,400 briefs, keyed to 1,005 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.
AI-generated podcast version of every brief — listen on the go, between classes, or whenever reading isn’t an option. New

Understand your casebook readings in seconds

Use our case briefs to comprehend your casebook readings faster, supplement your notes and outlines, and outshine your peers in class.

Get instant access to over 47,400+ expert-written case briefs in a searchable database keyed to 1,005 law school casebooks.

Start your free 7-day trial