Client Portal
Free Consultation
Free Consultation

Mass Torts

Paraquat Lawsuit (July 2025): Parkinson's Disease Claims and Settlements

Paraquat has been used for decades on farms across the country, even though it's one of the most toxic herbicides still in circulation. Now, thousands of former farmworkers, applicators, and others with long-term exposure are coming forward after being diagnosed with Parkinson's disease. The Paraquat lawsuit is at the center of these claims, holding manufacturers like Syngenta and Chevron responsible for failing to warn about the risks.

Click for Free Case Evaluation

Get Your Free Case Review

Find out if you qualify for compensation and learn your next steps – no cost, no obligation, just expert legal guidance.

Disclaimer: By submitting the form above and checking the consent box, you agree to our conditions and privacy policy and permit Ethen Ostroff Law to contact you via text messages, phone calls. Standard message rates may apply.


Get Your Free Case Review

Find out if you qualify for compensation and learn your next steps – no cost, no obligation, just expert legal guidance.

Disclaimer: By submitting the form above and checking the consent box, you agree to our conditions and privacy policy and permit Ethen Ostroff Law to contact you via text messages, phone calls. Standard message rates may apply.


As of July 2025, nearly 8,000 lawsuits are still active in the federal multidistrict litigation in Illinois. A few settlements have been reached, and more could be finalized soon, but the first major trial isn’t expected until later this year. For many families, the big questions are simple: Will there be a Paraquat settlement? How much could settlements look like? And how long does a Paraquat settlement take?

If you’ve been diagnosed with Parkinson’s after years of handling or working around Paraquat, here’s a closer look at where things stand and what options you might have

Paraquat Lawsuit

What Is Paraquat?

Paraquat is a highly toxic herbicide that’s been sprayed on American crops since the 1960s. It’s designed to kill weeds, grasses, and other unwanted vegetation and is often used on soybeans, corn, cotton, and vineyards. Because of its danger to humans, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) classifies Paraquat as a “restricted use” chemical, which means only certified, licensed applicators can buy or handle it.

Paraquat is sold under a number of trade names, including:

  • Gramoxone  
  • Firestorm 
  • Parazone 
  • Helmquat 3SL 
  • Paraquat Concentrate 
  • Ortho-Paraquat 
  • Cyclone SL 2.0 
  • Para-Shot 3.0 
  • Quick-Quat 
  • Devour 
  • Bonedry 
  • Blanco

Companies connected to Paraquat’s manufacture and distribution include Syngenta (formerly ICI), Chevron, and several other agrochemical producers. Despite being banned in many countries, Paraquat remains widely used in the United States—and its link to Parkinson’s disease has led to thousands of Parkinson’s lawsuits, including those in the Paraquat lawsuit MDL.

Get Free Consultation

How Does Paraquat Work?

Paraquat is made to kill plants quickly. When it hits the leaves, it starts breaking down the cells and stops the plant from making food. That reaction produces compounds that tear apart the tissue, and the plant dries out and dies. Most Paraquat sprays also have other ingredients mixed in so the liquid spreads more evenly across the leaves.

The problem is that Paraquat doesn’t just react this way with plants. If it gets into a person’s system, it sets off a similar chain reaction that can damage the lungs and other organs. Even swallowing or inhaling a small amount can be deadly, which is why only licensed applicators are allowed to use it in the United States and why a lot of countries have banned it altogether.

Paraquat Banned Across the Globe

Paraquat is still used in the United States, but many other countries have already banned it. Switzerland, where Syngenta—one of the biggest Paraquat manufacturers—is based, stopped using it back in 1989. The European Union, including England, followed by banning Paraquat in 2013.

What’s unusual is that one of Syngenta’s largest factories for Paraquat is in Northern England, even though it can’t be sold or used there. Most of what’s made ends up shipped to places like the U.S., where the herbicide is still legal.

Even China, which is often known for looser rules on industrial chemicals, announced back in 2012 that it would start phasing Paraquat out to “protect people’s lives.” Now, all the Paraquat made there is for export only. Other countries have been moving in the same direction, citing studies that connect long-term exposure to serious health risks, including Parkinson’s disease.

Increased Paraquat Use in the United States

In the last decade, Paraquat use has grown a lot across American farms. Farmers used to rely on Monsanto’s Roundup for most weed control, but weeds have started becoming resistant to it. On top of that, the lawsuits over Roundup’s health risks have pushed a lot of growers to look for other options.

For many, Paraquat became a go-to replacement, especially in soybean fields. In fact, the use of Paraquat on soybeans has gone up about four times in the past ten years. Back in 2016 alone, roughly 7 million pounds of Paraquat were sprayed across nearly 15 million acres in the United States.

Even though it’s widely used, Paraquat isn’t something anyone can just buy and apply. It’s classified as a Restricted Use Pesticide, which means only people with proper EPA and state certifications can handle it legally.

EPA Review and New Safety Rules for Paraquat

The Environmental Protection Agency started looking more closely at Paraquat’s health risks back in 2016. The review was part of the agency’s routine process, where they re-evaluate pesticides about every 15 years. In that filing, the EPA pointed out that there was a large amount of research linking Paraquat use to Parkinson’s disease.

Even with those concerns, Paraquat wasn’t banned. Instead, in August 2021, the EPA put stricter safety rules in place for how it can be used in the United States. The changes included:

  • Limiting aerial spraying and requiring buffer zones near homes. 
  • Banning the use of pressurized handguns and backpack sprayers. 
  • Requiring enclosed cabs or respirators for boom sprayers. 
  • Extending the time workers must wait before re-entering treated fields for certain crops.

These rules were meant to lower the risks for workers and nearby residents, but Paraquat is still legal and widely used in U.S. farming.

Who Faces the Most Paraquat Exposure?

Paraquat exposure is most common for people who live or work around farms. However, some groups face far greater risks than others:

  • Workers who mix, load, spray, or clean Paraquat equipment 
  • Farmworkers in fields that were recently treated 
  • Agricultural workers in countries with weaker safety rules and little protective gear 
  • People living near large farming operations where drift can reach nearby homes

Because these groups face the highest risks, the EPA classifies Paraquat as a restricted-use pesticide. Only certified applicators are allowed to handle it, and they must follow strict rules to limit exposure.

Get Free Consultation

Health Risks from Paraquat Exposure

Paraquat is incredibly toxic. A small amount can cause life-threatening damage, and there’s no antidote. How it affects the body depends on how someone comes into contact with it, but it spreads fast and often attacks the lungs, kidneys, and liver first.

Swallowing Paraquat is by far the most dangerous. Even a sip can be fatal. People who ingest it usually feel pain and swelling in the mouth and throat within hours, along with nausea, vomiting, and stomach pain. In severe cases, fluid builds up in the lungs, breathing becomes harder, and organs like the heart, liver, and kidneys can start to fail. Smaller amounts may not hit as fast, but the damage builds up—scarring in the lungs or organ failure can still set in days or weeks later.

Paraquat can also burn the skin if it gets on cuts or rashes. The area can turn red, swell, blister, or peel. Breathing it in is another risk, since inhalation can trigger lung damage that often gets worse over time.

Most cases of severe poisoning involve multiple organs. The lungs take the biggest hit, often leading to fatal scarring and respiratory failure. The kidneys and liver can shut down as the poison moves through the bloodstream. The heart and digestive tract can be damaged as well. And studies suggest Paraquat may harm brain cells, which is one reason researchers believe it’s connected to Parkinson’s disease.

To cut down on accidents, Paraquat sold in the U.S. is mixed with dyes, strong odors, and chemicals that make a person vomit if they swallow it. Even with those safeguards, it’s dangerous enough that only trained and licensed workers are allowed to use it.

Studies on Paraquat and Parkinson's Disease

For years, researchers have been looking at how Paraquat exposure affects the brain, and many studies point to the same thing—a higher risk of Parkinson’s disease in people who work with it or even live near where it’s sprayed.

Some of the earliest research from the late ’90s showed that people exposed to Paraquat were more likely to be diagnosed with Parkinson’s than those who weren’t. Since then, studies on both people and animals have built on those findings. Tests on mice showed Paraquat damages the same brain cells that die off in Parkinson’s. Other research in farming communities, especially in California, has linked living or working near Paraquat-treated fields to higher rates of the disease, even decades later.

While scientists still debate exactly how Paraquat triggers these changes in the brain, most agree it has to do with oxidative stress—a process where cells are damaged by unstable molecules the chemical creates. That damage can spread over time, eventually affecting movement and motor control, which are the hallmarks of Parkinson’s disease.

This body of research is one reason so many countries have banned Paraquat and why lawsuits in the United States keep growing.

About Parkinson's Disease

Parkinson’s disease is a brain disorder that affects how the body moves. It happens when the brain loses too many cells that make dopamine, a chemical that helps control movement. Doctors aren’t completely sure what causes it. However, they believe it’s a mix of genetics and environmental triggers, including long-term exposure to certain toxins and pesticides. Having a family history can also raise the risk.

Diagnosed more often in men, the disease tends to show up later in life, often around age 60 or older. Still, younger people can develop it too. The symptoms usually start mild and get worse over time. By the time those symptoms appear, most people have already lost a large portion of the dopamine-producing cells in their brain.

There’s no cure yet, but treatments can make life easier. Medications that boost dopamine, physical therapy, lifestyle changes, and, in some cases, surgery can all help manage symptoms and improve day-to-day living.

Parkinson's Disease Stages

Doctors often describe Parkinson’s disease by stages, but the way it progresses can be very different from person to person. Symptoms can include both movement issues and non-motor changes, and not everyone follows the same path. Still, the stages below are commonly used as a general guide to understand how the condition can progress.

  • Stage 1: Symptoms are mild and usually show up on one side of the body. Tremors or stiffness might be noticeable, or small changes in expression or posture. Most people can still handle daily activities without trouble.
  • Stage 2: Symptoms spread to both sides. Movements slow down, stiffness increases, and changes in walking or speech can appear. Even with these changes, most people can live on their own without much help.
  • Stage 3: Balance starts to be affected, and movements slow even more. Falls become a risk, and daily tasks can take more effort. Some people need a little assistance at this point, but many still live fairly independently.
  • Stage 4: Symptoms become severe. Walking or standing often requires help or a walker, and daily care is harder to manage alone. Many need regular assistance, even if they can still move around a bit with support.
  • Stage 5: This is the most advanced stage. Most people can’t stand or walk on their own and spend most of their time in a wheelchair or bed. Around-the-clock care is usually needed, and some experience hallucinations, delusions, or dementia alongside the physical symptoms. 

Symptoms of Parkinson's Disease

Parkinson’s disease shows up differently for everyone, but it’s most often recognized by the way it affects movement. For a lot of people, including many who later connect their illness to Paraquat exposure, the first signs are small changes, like a hand that shakes when it’s resting or movements that don’t feel as smooth as they used to.

Other symptoms can build over time, including:

  • Movements that start slowing down or feel harder to control 
  • Trouble keeping balance, which can make falls more common 
  • Muscles that feel stiff or tight, sometimes changing the way someone walks or stands 
  • A face that doesn’t show as much expression as before, sometimes with drooling 
  • Handwriting that gets smaller or more cramped 
  • Changes in speech, like talking softer, sounding monotone, or slurring 
  • Feeling lightheaded, dizzy, or just worn out 
  • Sleep problems—trouble staying asleep, vivid dreams, or moving around while dreaming 
  • Mood changes, like anxiety, low motivation, or depression 
  • Memory lapses or moments of confusion, sometimes worse at night

Because many of these signs can look like other health issues—and the early ones are easy to miss—getting checked by a doctor is important. For people thinking about a Paraquat lawsuit, having a confirmed Parkinson’s diagnosis is also necessary to move forward with a claim.

Paraquat Parkinson's Lawsuits

Over the past few years, thousands of people have filed lawsuits against the makers of Paraquat. Most of these cases come from farmers, field workers, or people who spent years around the herbicide and later developed Parkinson’s disease. The lawsuits claim the companies behind Paraquat knew how dangerous it was but never gave proper warnings.

Some of these cases are personal injury lawsuits from people living with Parkinson’s. Others are wrongful death cases filed by families who lost someone after years of exposure. A few also include claims from spouses whose lives were upended when their partner got sick.

These lawsuits are spread across state courts in places like California, Delaware, Illinois, Florida, Pennsylvania, and Washington. Some courts have combined their Paraquat cases to make things move faster. For example, the Court of Common Pleas in Philadelphia grouped dozens of cases together, and Delaware’s state courts have done something similar.

There’s also a big federal case, known as multidistrict litigation (MDL), in the Southern District of Illinois. An MDL lets one judge handle a large group of lawsuits with the same core issues, so they can be resolved more efficiently. This one—In re: Paraquat Products Liability Litigation, MDL No. 3004—has been running since 2021 under Judge Nancy J. Rosenstengel. As of mid-2025, there are still over 6,000 active lawsuits. The first test trial (called a bellwether trial) is supposed to start in October 2025, but that could change if the companies decide to settle or more negotiations happen first.

Who's Being Sued in the Paraquat Cases?

The companies facing most of the Paraquat lawsuits are the ones behind making, selling, or distributing the herbicide in the U.S. The names that come up the most are:

  • Syngenta is the big one. It’s based in Switzerland but has deep roots in Paraquat’s history, going back to Imperial Chemical Industries, which first developed the chemical. Over the years, Syngenta has promoted and sold Paraquat, and it’s worked alongside Chevron to get it manufactured and distributed here. Many lawsuits name Syngenta directly, as well as its subsidiaries like Syngenta Crop Protection LLC.
  • Chevron‘s role comes through its link to the California Chemical Company, Ortho Division—the company that originally partnered with Syngenta to bring Paraquat into the U.S. market. Chevron is now seen as the successor to that operation and is a frequent defendant.
  • FMC Corporation, based in Philadelphia, is another company tied to the litigation. It’s one of the largest Paraquat distributors in the country and has been pulled into many of these cases as well

Key Allegations in Paraquat Lawsuits

Most of the lawsuits over Paraquat and Parkinson’s center on the same issues with Syngenta, Chevron, and other companies tied to the herbicide. The main points usually look like this:

  • Failure to Warn: People suing say the companies either knew or should have known that Paraquat had been linked to Parkinson’s in multiple studies. Yet, the warning labels and marketing never really told users how risky it could be or how to protect themselves.
  • Defective Design: Paraquat is incredibly toxic that makes it unreasonably dangerous. Safer options were out there, but it stayed on the market. Many experts believe its chemical properties trigger oxidative stress, which can damage dopamine-producing brain cells—something strongly tied to Parkinson’s.
  • Negligence: These cases also claim the companies skipped proper testing, ignored red flags in research, and didn’t put enough safeguards in place. Some filings even accuse them of burying evidence that showed neurological risks so they could keep selling the product.
  • Long-Term Exposure: The people bringing these cases are farmworkers, pesticide applicators, or folks living near fields where Paraquat was sprayed for years. They believe years of contact played a big role in their Parkinson’s diagnoses.
  • Concealment: Some lawsuits reference leaked corporate records, often called the “Paraquat Papers.” These documents suggest the companies actively tried to downplay or hide evidence showing how dangerous Paraquat really was.
  • Damages: For families who lost loved ones to Parkinson’s complications and for spouses whose lives were completely upended by their partner’s illness, many of these cases also ask for compensation beyond medical expenses and lost income.

Paraquat Lawsuit Update

July 2, 2025: Paraquat case filings slowed a bit heading into July, with 1,190 lawsuits currently on record. Even with the dip, lawyers are still moving cases forward so clients don’t lose out on any potential settlement, and filings could pick up again once a deal is announced.

June 3, 2025: The Paraquat MDL in Illinois has grown to 6,159 active cases, up from 6,036 in May. Settlement talks are ongoing, but lawyers are still rushing to file claims before a final deal is reached, knowing late cases could face tougher limits or smaller payouts.

May 28, 2025: State court cases are gaining momentum as the federal MDL edges toward a settlement. Pennsylvania and California filings keep climbing, with Los Angeles cases heading for a 2026 trial and Pennsylvania expected to see one later this year, adding pressure to negotiations.

May 14, 2025: There are now over 6,000 active Paraquat lawsuits in federal court, with families dealing with Parkinson’s disease following the case closely. Paraquat settlement discussions are moving forward, but trial dates remain on the calendar to keep the process moving and leverage intact.

May 2, 2025: The Paraquat MDL, overseen by Judge Nancy J. Rosenstengel, has reached 6,036 active cases. A federal settlement looks close, but cases in California, Illinois, and Pennsylvania are still active, and anyone considering a claim may need to act quickly before settlement terms close the door.

April 14, 2025: A settlement framework has been signed in the Paraquat MDL, covering most of the more than 5,800 pending cases. The deal may also include coordinated state cases in Philadelphia and Illinois, and with appeals paused, this could signal the beginning of the end for the litigation.

April 11, 2025: A Missouri man has joined the Paraquat MDL, claiming years of exposure led to his Parkinson’s disease. His lawsuit against Syngenta and Chevron seeks both compensatory and punitive damages for the harm caused by the herbicide.

April 1, 2025: The Paraquat MDL currently lists 5,859 active cases, but that number may drop soon. The court is moving to dismiss over 100 lawsuits that repeatedly missed Plaintiff Assessment Questionnaire deadlines, clearing out inactive cases to focus on stronger ones.

March 31, 2025: A farming couple from Iowa has filed a new Paraquat lawsuit, claiming the husband’s years of exposure caused his Parkinson’s disease. Their case accuses Syngenta and Chevron of defective design, negligence, and failure to warn, with the wife also seeking damages for loss of consortium.

March 24, 2025: Over 100 Paraquat lawsuits are expected to be dismissed this week for repeatedly missing filing deadlines. The court is clearing out stalled cases to keep the MDL focused on active claims.

March 5, 2025: The Paraquat MDL added 21 new cases in February, bringing the total to 5,859. While filings have slowed over the last two months, the litigation remains active as Paraquat settlement talks continue.

February 10, 2025: A Michigan resident has filed a Parkinson’s lawsuit, claiming exposure between 1970 and 1976 led to his Parkinson’s diagnosis. Filed in Illinois as part of MDL-3004, the case accuses Syngenta and Chevron of selling a dangerous herbicide without proper warnings and concealing its risks.

February 3, 2025: The Paraquat MDL now has 5,838 cases after 13 dismissals, marking the second month in a row of declining numbers. The court continues removing non-compliant plaintiffs, though active claims remain steady, and new lawsuits are still being filed.

February 1, 2025: The University of Delaware is pushing back against a subpoena in a Paraquat lawsuit involving a Maryland farmer diagnosed with Parkinson’s in 2017. The school argues the demand for 60 years of records is overly broad and not relevant to the case.

January 6, 2025: Two Paraquat lawsuits were filed in the MDL to start the year. One involves a Maryland man who worked as a chemical applicator from 1988 to 2016 and was diagnosed in 2021, while the other comes from the family of a New York woman who farmed for decades before developing Parkinson’s and passing away in 2023.

January 5, 2025: The Paraquat MDL lost 10 cases in December, bringing the total down to 5,825. It’s the second time in three months the docket has shrunk as the court continues dismissing stalled or non-compliant claims.

December 31, 2024: Special Master Randi Ellis has recommended dismissing 47 Paraquat cases for failing to submit the required Plaintiff Assessment Questionnaires. The dismissals would be without prejudice, so these claims could be refiled later.

December 20, 2024: Judge Nancy Rosenstengel told plaintiffs’ lawyers to do more to keep their clients informed about the MDL. Her chambers have been getting calls from confused plaintiffs, and with thousands of cases in play, the court says better communication is essential.

December 17, 2024: Dr. Martin Wells, a key expert for Paraquat plaintiffs, has been barred from testifying in California state cases, following a similar ruling in the MDL. Plaintiffs’ lawyers are now leaning on other experts and independent studies to keep building their cases.

December 15, 2024: The first Paraquat trial is set for March in Philadelphia, with another scheduled for June. Many expect Syngenta and Chevron to settle before these trials, possibly as part of a broader resolution.

December 12, 2024: A Missouri man has filed a Paraquat Parkinson’s lawsuit, claiming decades of exposure caused his Parkinson’s disease. He says Paraquat exposure was constant while living and working on farmland from 1965 to 1994 and again from 2014 to 2017, and the lawsuit accuses Syngenta and Chevron of selling a toxic product without proper warnings.

December 9, 2024: Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s nomination as Secretary of Health and Human Services is drawing attention from people following the Paraquat litigation. Kennedy has long pushed for stricter environmental protections and spoken out against chemicals like Paraquat, which could add pressure on regulators and defendants alike.

December 1, 2024: Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s possible confirmation as HHS Secretary is being closely watched by those involved in Paraquat lawsuits. His history of challenging chemical companies and backing tougher environmental rules could shift public sentiment and put added heat on Syngenta and Chevron.

November 21, 2024: Senator Cory Booker and six other senators are calling on the EPA to ban Paraquat, pointing to its dangers for farmworkers, rural communities, and pregnancies. They note that over 70 countries, including China and Brazil, already ban the chemical, and most U.S. farms don’t rely on it, though a ban here isn’t expected just yet.

October 24, 2024: Paraquat defendants are asking the MDL judge to enforce Case Management Order #21, which requires proof of exposure. Their motion targets 590 plaintiffs who haven’t complied, asking the court to dismiss those claims with prejudice.

September 10, 2024: A Delaware judge has ordered Syngenta and another company to share certain legal documents connected to Paraquat cases. The ruling lets insurers like Hartford and Travelers access non-privileged files, which could help free up funds for future settlements.

August 28, 2024: A judge has ruled on Special Master Randi Ellis’s recommendation to dismiss several Paraquat lawsuits over missed questionnaire deadlines. Some plaintiffs fixed their filings in time, while others dropped their cases, but the remaining non-compliant suits will be dismissed without prejudice.

August 24, 2024: Special Master Ellis has recommended dismissing 76 Paraquat lawsuits for repeated failure to file Plaintiff Assessment Questionnaires. Clearing these stalled cases allows the MDL to keep moving with the active ones.

August 21, 2024: A Paraquat class action has been certified in Canada. The British Columbia Supreme Court approved the case to represent Canadians diagnosed after working with Gramoxone products dating back to July 1963.

August 19, 2024: An Arkansas groundskeeper has filed a Paraquat lawsuit, saying years of exposure caused his Parkinson’s disease. He says he followed the instructions but was never warned about the long-term risks, and his case seeks compensation for his health and financial losses.

August 16, 2024: The Paraquat Plaintiffs’ Committee has released a new status update. Ten federal cases are in the bellwether trial pool with discovery underway; Pennsylvania’s first state trial is scheduled for April 2025, and Delaware plaintiffs are revising pleadings to move their cases forward.

August 15, 2024: The EPA has officially banned Dacthal, another pesticide, over rising health concerns. The decision is expected to trigger new lawsuits and could add to the growing scrutiny on products like Paraquat and Roundup.

August 5, 2024: Ten Paraquat lawsuits have been chosen for the next federal bellwether trial pool. Fact sheets are due September 3; depositions by November 25; and one-page case summaries will be submitted to the court in December.

May 22, 2024: A new study has found a strong connection between environmental toxins and Parkinson’s disease, with workplace exposure carrying the highest risk. The research points to chemicals like harmful dyes, methylene chloride, and even pollutants in whale meat, supporting claims that pesticides like Paraquat play a role in the disease.

May 16, 2024: An Arkansas widow has filed a Paraquat Parkinson’s lawsuit over her husband’s Parkinson’s diagnosis and death. He worked on his family farm from 1965 to 1975, often handling Paraquat without knowing the risks, developed symptoms around 2007, and died in 2021 with Parkinson’s contributing to his death.

April 17, 2024: Chief Judge Rosenstengel has dismissed four Paraquat bellwether cases after blocking testimony from plaintiffs’ expert Dr. Martin Wells. Those plaintiffs can’t prove causation without that evidence, but the MDL continues with sixteen new cases now set for discovery as lawyers bring in additional experts.

April 4, 2024: A Florida widow has filed a wrongful death lawsuit, claiming her husband’s years of Paraquat exposure in Connecticut caused his Parkinson’s disease and early death in 2022. He worked around the herbicide from 1966 to 2001, was diagnosed in 2019, and the case highlights how the disease can take decades to develop after exposure.

March 26, 2024: The MDL court is dismissing Paraquat lawsuits with weak evidence or inaccurate claims. While it’s a setback for those plaintiffs, removing questionable cases helps clear the path for stronger claims and potential settlements.

November 1, 2023: Dr. Douglas Weed has asked the court to quash a subpoena tied to his 2021 NeuroToxicology article questioning whether Paraquat causes Parkinson’s disease. He argues he isn’t part of the MDL, and the document requests are overly broad and beyond Rule 45’s limits on non-party discovery.

September 27, 2023: Both sides have filed their final Daubert briefs in the Paraquat MDL. After a week of hearings, the judge postponed the first bellwether trial to carefully review the expert witness challenges, since excluding plaintiffs’ experts could lead to thousands of dismissals.

August 21, 2023: The key Daubert hearing in the Paraquat MDL kicked off in Illinois, testing the strength of the plaintiffs’ science. Dr. Martin Wells testified that Paraquat likely contributes to the kind of cell damage seen in Parkinson’s, while Chevron and Syngenta attacked his credibility and argued genetics play a bigger role. The outcome could make or break the litigation, affecting both settlements and trial chances.

August 4, 2023: Over 300 people are suing over Paraquat in Pennsylvania state court, creating extra pressure on top of the MDL. Defendants are trying to block roughly 100 out-of-state plaintiffs, but a recent Supreme Court ruling on Pennsylvania’s consent-by-registration statute could undercut that effort, and companies remain wary of Philadelphia juries.

August 1, 2023: Judge Rosenstengel is preparing to decide if the scientific evidence linking Paraquat to Parkinson’s can be used at trial. She’s scheduled a Daubert hearing for later in August, ordered testimony from Dr. Martin Wells, and will allow final briefs through September before ruling by year’s end.

June 12, 2023: Chevron and Syngenta have asked the court to throw out thousands of Paraquat cases, arguing there’s no solid science connecting the herbicide to Parkinson’s disease. They also claim federal law overrides failure-to-warn claims because the EPA hasn’t confirmed a link, but most lawyers see this motion as a long shot despite its potential to wipe out over 3,700 lawsuits.

May 20, 2023: Judge Rosenstengel has tightened the rules for plaintiffs’ attorneys after finding some filed cases for people who had already passed away without proper checks. Lawyers now have to verify each client’s status, confirm communication with them or their estate, and document any date of death, which could help boost Paraquat settlement talks by ensuring the case list is credible.

May 3, 2023: A Daubert hearing in the Paraquat MDL will soon decide if the plaintiffs’ expert science can be presented at trial. The judge will look at whether the methods are reliable and accepted, and losing this hearing could gut the MDL, though plaintiffs’ lawyers remain confident their evidence holds up.

April 10, 2023: More than 200 Paraquat lawsuits in Pennsylvania have been grouped into a consolidated proceeding in Philadelphia, creating a state-level version of the federal MDL. The court has approved a streamlined Short Form Complaint for new plaintiffs, matching the federal process to speed up filings as the litigation grows.

April 27, 2023: The judge has denied Syngenta and Chevron’s bid to strike the rebuttal report from Dr. Martin Wells, a key expert for the plaintiffs. His deposition will move ahead, and the court has ordered both sides to finalize a schedule for summary judgment and Daubert motions.

March 27, 2023: Syngenta’s lawyers are trying to block testimony from Dr. Martin Wells, arguing he cherry-picked studies to back his conclusion that Paraquat exposure is tied to Parkinson’s disease. Wells used a meta-analysis of epidemiological research to support his opinion, and the judge will decide on this and other expert disputes before the first bellwether trial.

March 1, 2023: As the first Paraquat bellwether trial approaches, the two sides are clashing over which experts can testify. Most recently, defense lawyers asked the court to throw out a supplemental report from Penn State professor David Mortensen, calling it late since it was filed months after his deposition and past the expert’s deadline.

August 29, 2022: The first Paraquat bellwether trial has been postponed from November 2022 to July 2023, with a second trial also pushed back. Judge Rosenstengel granted more time for discovery, which slows settlement leverage, but many plaintiff lawyers believe the strength of the cases continues to build as the evidence and science develop.

May 11, 2022: Bayer’s recent loss in the Roundup cases could ripple into the Paraquat litigation. Bayer had been pushing a preemption defense, arguing federal pesticide laws blocked state failure-to-warn claims, but the Biden administration urged the Supreme Court to reject that view, making it harder for Chevron and Syngenta to rely on the same argument.

May 2, 2022: The judge overseeing the Paraquat MDL has picked six lawsuits for the first wave of bellwether trials this fall. These cases were chosen from a pool of sixteen, with both sides ranking their preferences, and fact and expert discovery is now moving ahead.

March 21, 2022: Sixteen Paraquat lawsuits have been chosen for the initial bellwether pool, evenly split between picks by the plaintiffs and defense. Fact discovery is expected to wrap up by the end of March, and both sides must rank their top five trial preferences by April 8.

March 3, 2022: Judge Rosenstengel has ruled on several defense motions to dismiss, throwing out public nuisance and Minnesota consumer protection claims but keeping the main cases alive. Plaintiffs also prevailed on statute of limitations arguments, clearing the way for the first trial, still scheduled for November 15, 2022.

February 1, 2022: The court has finalized sixteen cases for the first bellwether trial pool—eight chosen by each side. Four will be tried, with the first scheduled for November 2022, and all fact discovery is slated to wrap by mid-June.

August 19, 2021: Judge Nancy Rosenstengel held the first conference for the Paraquat MDL, laying out the roadmap for the litigation. The first trial is set for November 15, 2022, with a final pretrial hearing scheduled for October 27, 2022, giving victims a clear timeline to work toward.

How to File a Paraquat Lawsuit

If you’ve been diagnosed with Parkinson’s after years of being around Paraquat, here’s what the process usually looks like:

First, a lawyer will help figure out if you qualify. Most cases involve farmworkers, applicators, or people who lived near fields where Paraquat was sprayed and later developed Parkinson’s.

From there, you’ll need to pull together proof—anything showing how you were exposed. Your attorney can guide you through what’s needed and handle the actual filing.

Once your case is filed, both sides exchange evidence, question witnesses, and bring in experts. Settlement talks often happen during this stage, but if it doesn’t settle, your case could move toward trial.

Most Paraquat lawsuits end up in a federal MDL in Illinois, where test trials (called bellwether trials) help set the stage for settlements. These cases can take time, so it’s a process you’ll need to be patient with.

Remember that there are deadlines for filing a lawsuit. To protect your rights, it’s important to take action quickly and talk to a lawyer as soon as you can. This way, you can make sure your case is filed on time.

How to File a Paraquat Parkinson's Lawsuit

If you’ve been diagnosed with Parkinson’s after years of working with or around Paraquat, here’s what usually happens when you decide to take legal action:

  • First, a lawyer will help figure out if you qualify. Most cases involve farmworkers, applicators, or people who lived near fields where Paraquat was sprayed and later developed Parkinson’s.
  • From there, you’ll need to pull together proof—anything showing how you were exposed. Your attorney can guide you through what’s needed and handle the actual filing.
  • Once your case is filed, both sides exchange evidence, question witnesses, and bring in experts. Settlement talks often happen during this stage, but if it doesn’t settle, your case could move toward trial.
  • Most Paraquat lawsuits end up in a federal MDL in Illinois, where test trials (called bellwether trials) help set the stage for settlements. These cases can take time; a process you’ll need to be patient with.

There are deadlines for filing a lawsuit. Act quickly and talk to a lawyer as soon as you can to make sure your case is filed on time.

Who Can File a Parkinson's Lawsuit?

At Ethen Ostroff Law, we look at a few key things before moving forward with a Paraquat case.

First, there can’t be any statute of limitations problems unless the claim is for someone who has passed away—those deadlines depend on the state.

Second, there must be a confirmed diagnosis of Parkinson’s disease.

Finally, there needs to be proof of exposure to Paraquat or products that contained it. These include brands like Ortho-Paraquat, Gramoxone, Blanco, Cyclone SL 2.0, Firestorm, Helmquat 3SL, Bonedry, Devour, and Para-Shot 3.0.

Evidence for Paraquat Parkinson's Disease Cases

Putting the evidence together for a Paraquat lawsuit can feel like a lot to take on. A lawyer familiar with these cases can help organize everything, so nothing gets left out.

Here’s the kind of proof that usually helps move a case forward:

  • Medical records that confirm your Parkinson’s diagnosis and track your treatment 
  • Documents showing you worked in farming, landscaping, or another job where Paraquat was used 
  • Old receipts, invoices, or logs tied to Paraquat purchases or applications 
  • Statements from people who can confirm your exposure, like coworkers, neighbors, or family 
  • Opinions or testimony from doctors connecting your illness to Paraquat 
  • Lab results or toxicology reports pointing to chemical exposure 
  • Paperwork showing you were certified to handle Paraquat, since only licensed applicators can legally use it

Having as much of this as you can find will help show your case has weight and can keep things moving if it ends up in settlement talks or court.

Compensation for Paraquat Injuries

A Parkinson’s diagnosis changes everything. There’s no cure, and the costs—both financial and personal—can add up fast. A lawsuit can help ease some of that burden by covering things like:

  • Medical costs you’ve already paid, along with treatment, therapy, and care you’ll need in the future 
  • Wages you’ve lost and income you’re likely to miss out on down the line 
  • The physical and emotional strain the disease brings into your daily life 
  • The loss of being able to enjoy the activities and routines that once mattered to you 
  • The cost of help, whether it’s in-home care, assisted living, or support from family 
  • Extra damages when it’s proven the manufacturers acted with serious negligence or disregard

These forms of compensation are meant to help people and families manage the weight of life with Parkinson’s tied to Paraquat exposure.

Moving Forward with Ethen Ostroff Law

Thousands of families are waiting for answers, watching closely for the latest on Paraquat lawsuit developments. If you’re wondering about Paraquat lawsuit settlement amounts or asking how long does Paraquat settlement takes, now is the time to get answers.

Whether you’re part of the Paraquat class action lawsuit or filing your own case, Ethen Ostroff Law can help you understand your options and make sure your claim is on track. Call now for a free consultation.

Frequently Asked Questions

Researchers have found a strong connection between paraquat exposure and Parkinson’s disease. People who worked around the herbicide—like farmworkers, landscapers, or those living near treated fields—face a higher risk of developing the illness. Studies also show paraquat can damage brain cells in ways that line up with how Parkinson’s develops.

Researchers have found a strong connection between paraquat exposure and Parkinson’s disease. People who worked around the herbicide—like farmworkers, landscapers, or those living near treated fields—face a higher risk of developing the illness. Studies also show paraquat can damage brain cells in ways that line up with how Parkinson’s develops.

The paraquat litigation is still active, with thousands of Parkinson’s-related claims moving through federal and state courts. Settlement talks are ongoing, but final details—like payment amounts and timelines—haven’t been made public yet. If no global deal is reached, some cases could head to trial later in 2025.

While exact figures aren’t set, most estimates put Paraquat settlements anywhere from $100,000 for smaller cases to close to $900,000 for those with strong evidence. Many attorneys believe the average payout will likely land in the $600,000 to $900,000 range. The final numbers will depend on exposure, medical proof, and how negotiations wrap up.

His career began in public service as a Surveillance Officer in Maricopa County, where he gained firsthand experience in high-stakes decision-making and developed a deep sense of discipline and accountability. He later served as Chief Operating Officer of a fast-growing law firm, driving efficiency, revenue growth, and team development. Today, Ryan focuses on helping law firms reach their full potential by aligning people, processes, and long-term vision. A strategic thinker and empowering leader, Ryan is passionate about developing others and guiding organizations through meaningful, lasting growth.

Passionate about securing legal rights, Joseph actively participates in pro bono work through various organizations, including Christian Legal Aid of Pittsburgh and the ABA Military Pro Bono Project. Licensed to practice in Pennsylvania and the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania, he is a member of the Allegheny County and Pennsylvania Bar Associations. Outside of work, Joseph enjoys sports, reading, and creative writing, and has been involved in rowing and curling. He resides in Mt. Lebanon, Pennsylvania, with his parents.

Success

We received your information. We’ll be in touch soon.

Ok
While in law school, he distinguished himself as Executive Editor of JURIS Magazine, received the prestigious CALI Excellence for the Future Award, and completed five hands-on internships that laid a strong foundation for his legal career.


Nicholas began his post-graduate career clerking for the Honorable Linda Rovder Fleming in the Cambria County Court of Common Pleas. From there, he quickly found his calling in workers’ compensation, personal injury, and Social Security disability law—areas where he could directly impact people’s lives in moments of crisis. He’s helped clients navigate complex legal claims, including securing a settlement exceeding $300,000.

Nicholas brings clear communication, genuine empathy, and an unrelenting drive to achieve the best outcomes for his clients. Whether he’s navigating a complex workers’ comp claim or pushing for a major settlement, he brings focus, dedication, and deep legal knowledge to every case.

He’s also a proud member of Pennsylvania Advocates for Justice and remains active in various professional legal organizations. Nicholas is licensed to practice law in Pennsylvania.

When he’s not fighting for the injured, Nicholas is enjoying time with his family, kicking a soccer ball around, hitting the golf course, or cheering on Pittsburgh’s local teams.

Joe Ring heads the workers’ compensation department at Ethen Ostroff Law, where he takes pride in fighting for injured workers.

Joe is a Philadelphia native and maintains deep roots in the area.  As the grandson of a Philadelphia Firefighter, son of a Philadelphia public school teacher, and veteran of the United State Marine Corps, he was taught to value service, dedication, and hard work.   He applies these values to every case and takes great satisfaction in representing hard-working clients with those same traits.

After obtaining his bachelor’s degree in history from St. Vincent College in Western Pennsylvania, he graduated from Villanova Law School in 2012 and, since then, has litigated hundreds of workers’ compensation hearings and trial depositions on behalf of both employers and injured workers.  During this time, Mr. Ring has written articles and presented Continuing Legal Education courses on developments in Pennsylvania Workers’ Compensation Law.  He is active in local professional organizations, and, in 2022, he served a Co-chairperson of the Philadelphia Bar Associations Workers’ Compensation Section.

Since coming to EOL in 2024, he has dedicated his practice entirely to helping injured workers navigate the system and obtain their rightful benefits.

Joe is licensed to practice in Pennsylvania.

Brandon Zanan heads the personal injury claim department with Ethen Ostroff Law.

Brandon’s education in both law and medicine assist him in expertly representing badly injured victims. Brandon has a Master’s Degree in Forensic Medicine from the Philadelphia College of Osteopathic Medicine, with a concentration in anatomy and pathology. With this knowledge,  Brandon is skilled at analyzing medical records and understanding injuries that are common in personal injury claims. He uses this expertise in conjunction with listening carefully to each client’s needs, in order to fiercely advocate for clients and tell their stories when they would not otherwise have a voice.

Brandon’s background includes a variety of experience and skills in various areas of civil practice. He is the author and editor of numerous books for the George T. Bisel Publishing Company, including “Pennsylvania Damages” and the “Pennsylvania Vehicle Code Annotated,” two texts that are frequently relied on by lawyers and judges across Pennsylvania as authoritative resources on personal injury law.

Brandon is a member of the Pennsylvania and Montgomery Bar Associations. He is also a member of Pennsylvania Association for Justice, and has served as an executive board member of the Montgomery American Inn of Court.

He is admitted to practice in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, the United States District Courts for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania and Middle District of Pennsylvania, the State of New Jersey, the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey, and in the Commonwealth of Virginia. Brandon has represented many clients in motor vehicle, premises liability, animal bite, and products liability cases across Pennsylvania and New Jersey and has obtained outstanding results with millions of dollars recovered for his clients.

He has been named a Pennsylvania Rising Star from 2021 onward. The “Super Lawyers-Rising Star®”, list recognizes no more than 2.5 percent of attorneys in each state

Brandon currently lives in Malvern with his wife Rachel and their son Max.

Ethen Ostroff Law, PLLC Terms and Conditions

Effective Date: July 10, 2024

General Information

Welcome to the website of Ethen Ostroff Law, PLLC (“EO”). By accessing or using our website, you agree to be bound by these Terms and Conditions (“Terms”). If you do not agree with these Terms, please do not use our website.

Use

EO hereby grants you a non-exclusive, non-transferable, revocable, limited right and license to access and use the Site solely for your personal use in accordance with these Terms of Use. You shall not, in any way, otherwise copy, reproduce, distribute, transmit, display, perform, reproduce, publish, license, modify, create derivative works from, sell, or exploit the Site.

EO may at any time, for any reason, and without notice or liability: (a) modify, suspend, or terminate operation of or access to the Site and related services, or (b) change, revise, or modify the Site and affiliated services.

Messaging and Automated Calls

When you opt-in, you will receive text messages (SMS/MMS) on your mobile number. These messages may contain information about your case, and the message frequency may vary from user to user. Please note that message and data rates may apply. If you wish to opt out of this service, you can do so anytime by simply texting “STOP” to the phone number. Once you text “STOP” to us, we will send you an SMS to confirm that you have been unsubscribed. If you encounter any issues, you can reply with the keyword “HELP” to get assistance. Please be aware that carriers are not responsible for any delayed or undelivered messages.

By providing your phone number and submitting a form on our website, you consent to receive communications, including automated calls, texts, and pre-recorded messages, from EO and its affiliates. These communications may include updates about your case, promotional offers, and other information. You understand that these calls may be generated using automated technology, and that standard message and data rates may apply.

Your consent to receive automated calls is not a condition of any purchase or service. By checking the consent box on our contact form or by calling our firm, you agree to these Terms and Conditions and provide your written consent to receive these communications. You may opt out of these communications at any time by replying STOP to any text message or by contacting us at [insert contact information].

State-Specific Compliance

EO complies with all federal and state laws regarding automated calls and telemarketing practices. Certain states have additional restrictions on the use of automated dialing systems and pre-recorded messages. The following states have more restrictive regulations:

  • California: Requires prior express written consent for automated calls.
  • Florida: Requires prior express written consent for automated calls and texts.
  • New York: Requires prior express written consent for automated calls.
  • Texas: Requires prior express written consent for automated calls.

If you are a resident of one of these states, EO will obtain your prior express written consent before making any automated calls or sending pre-recorded messages to you.

By submitting a form inquiry or calling our firm, you agree to us contacting you, and your checking the box when submitting your form inquiry serves as written consent.

Information and Legal Disclaimer

The information contained in this website is for informational purposes only, and should not be construed as legal advice. Testimonials and case results contained in this website are for demonstrative purposes only, and do not constitute a guarantee of any particular outcome in a specific case.

By requesting a free consultation with Ethen Ostroff Law, PLLC, you agree to the following:

  • Any information I submit is for review only, and there will be no charge for the initial consultation.
  • I have not entered into an attorney-client relationship with Ethen Ostroff Law, PLLC until such time as a formal written Retainer Agreement is signed by myself and a representative of Ethen Ostroff Law, PLLC. There is no guarantee that Ethen Ostroff Law, PLLC will accept my case.
  • Any information received by Ethen Ostroff Law, PLLC, prior to the execution of a written Retainer Agreement, is not subject to the Attorney-Client Privilege and is not considered confidential.
  • Additional information may be requested in order for Ethen Ostroff Law, PLLC to make a decision on whether or not to accept my case.
  • Because no attorney-client relationship has been established, I will remain personally responsible to meet all necessary deadlines applicable to my claim, until such time as Ethen Ostroff Law, PLLC makes a final decision. I acknowledge that I have not received any representations or legal opinions with respect to any time frames or deadlines that may be applicable to my claim.

No Relationship or Obligation Arises from Use of the Site

The law differs in every jurisdiction, and you should not rely on any opinion except that of an attorney you have retained, who has a professional duty to advise you after being fully informed of all the pertinent facts, and who is licensed in the applicable state, and is familiar with the applicable law. Internet subscribers, mobile application users, and online readers should seek professional counsel about their legal rights and remedies. You should not act or refrain from acting on the basis of any information found on the Site. Any actions or decisions about your legal rights should be based on the particular facts and circumstances of your situation, and appropriate legal advice from an attorney retained directly by you. EO EXPRESSLY DISCLAIMS ALL LIABILITY WITH RESPECT TO ACTIONS TAKEN OR NOT TAKEN BASED UPON ANY INFORMATION OR OTHER CONTENTS OF THIS SITE. Viewing the Site, or communicating with EO by Internet e-mail or through the Site does not constitute or create an attorney-client relationship with anyone. The content and features on the Site do not create, and are not intended to create, an attorney-client relationship, and shall not be construed as legal advice. The content and features of the Site, including means to submit a question or information, do not constitute an offer to represent you or otherwise give rise to an attorney/client relationship.

THE SITE IS PROVIDED “AS IS”. EO MAKES NO WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, REGARDING THE SITE AND ONLINE SERVICES AND HEREBY DISCLAIMS ALL WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND OR NATURE, INCLUDING, WITHOUT LIMITATION, THE IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY, FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, ACCURACY, AND NON-INFRINGEMENT. WITHOUT LIMITING THE FOREGOING, EO DOES NOT GUARANTEE THAT THE ONLINE SERVICES OR PRODUCTS WILL MEET YOUR REQUIREMENTS, OR WILL BE ERROR-FREE, UNINTERRUPTED, OR FREE OF VIRUSES OR OTHER HARMFUL COMPONENTS, OR THAT ANY DEFECTS WILL BE CORRECTED.

Accounts

To use some features of the Site, you may be required to create an account. In connection therewith, you agree to provide and maintain true, accurate, current, and complete information about yourself. You are responsible for maintaining the confidentiality of the information you hold for your account login, including your password, and for all Submissions made from your account. You agree to notify us immediately of any unauthorized use of your login. EO may suspend access to your account if it suspects illegal or improper use, or for other reasons, such as for account management purposes, at its sole discretion.

Confidentiality is Not Guaranteed

Information sent to Ethen Ostroff Law, PLLC. via Internet e-mail or through the Site is not secure and is done on a non-confidential basis. EO may make reasonable efforts to keep communications private, but because of the nature of Internet communications and the absence of an attorney/client relationship, we cannot promise or guarantee confidentiality.

DISCLAIMER – This Site Does Not Provide Medical Diagnosis or Advice

The content provided on the Site, such as documents, text, graphics, images, videos, news alerts, pharmaceutical drug recalls, prescription medication history, or information on litigation concerning the foregoing topics, or other materials, is for informational purposes only. The information is not intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis, or treatment. Always consult a physician for diagnosis and treatment of any medical condition or for any questions you may have regarding a health concern. Never disregard professional medical advice, alter a prescription plan in any way, or delay or refrain from seeking medical advice because of something you have read or seen on the Site. Links to other sites are provided for information only. Use of trade names is for identification only and does not constitute endorsement by EO.

Without limiting the generality of the foregoing, the Site may present information about pharmaceutical drug recalls, which is for information purposes only. Such information is not necessarily the most current information on the subject and may or may not be updated based on the last information concerning such recalls. Do not make any decisions regarding medication or medical providers based on information from the Site, including but not limited to information we provide about drug recalls.

EO Is Not Responsible for Content; Limitation on Liability

EO may periodically change, remove, or add the material on the Site without notice. This material may contain technical or typographical errors. EO DOES NOT GUARANTEE ITS ACCURACY, COMPLETENESS OR SUITABILITY. EO assumes no liability or responsibility for any errors or omissions in the contents of the Site. Your use of the Site is at your own risk. Under no circumstances shall EO or any other party involved in the creation, production, or delivery of the Site be liable to you or any other person for any indirect, special, incidental, or consequential damages of any kind arising from your access to, or use of, the Site. TO THE MAXIMUM EXTENT PERMITTED BY APPLICABLE LAW IN NO EVENT SHALL EO BE LIABLE FOR ANY SPECIAL, INDIRECT, OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES RELATING TO THIS MATERIAL, FOR ANY USE OF THIS WEBSITE, OR FOR ANY OTHER LINKED WEBSITE.

Third-party Web Sites

The Site contains links to third-party websites for the convenience of our users. EO does not endorse any of these third-party sites and does not imply any association between EO and those sites. EO does not control these third-party websites and cannot represent that their policies and practices will be consistent with these Terms of Use. If you use links to access and use such websites, you do so at your own risk. EO is not responsible for the contents or availability of any linked sites. These links are provided only as a convenience to the recipient. These Terms only apply to the Site and do not apply to any linked sites. We encourage you to read and understand the terms of use of any linked sites that you visit. Links do not imply that we sponsor, endorse, are affiliated with or associated with, or are legally authorized to use any trademark, trade name, service mark, design, logo, symbol, or other copyrighted materials displayed on or accessible through any linked site.

EO Clients

Only individuals who have entered into a mutually signed retainer agreement with EO are EO clients (“EO Clients”).

Legal and Ethical Requirements

EO has tried to comply with all legal and ethical requirements in compiling the Site. We welcome comments about our compliance with the applicable rules and will update the Site as warranted, upon learning of any new or different requirements.

Ethen Ostroff Law reserves the right to refer or sell leads that come through any of Ethen Ostroff Law’s marketing.

Ethen Ostroff Law also may sell leads on certain campaigns generated in association with third party marketing companies.

Governing Laws in Case of Dispute; Jurisdiction

These Terms of Use shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of Pennsylvania, USA, without regard to any choice of law principles. Any and all disputes arising hereunder shall be governed as set forth in the Arbitration section below.

Submissions

You are solely responsible for any information, content, or material you transmit to or through the Site (“Submissions”). You understand that Submissions are considered non-confidential and non-proprietary. Furthermore, you grant EO an unrestricted, irrevocable, perpetual, transferable, sublicensable, worldwide, royalty-free license to use, copy, reproduce, display, publish, publicly perform, transmit, and distribute any Submission, without compensation or accounting to you or anyone else. You represent and warrant that: (a) you have the right to submit the Submission to EO and grant the licenses as described above; (b) EO will not need to obtain licenses from any third party or pay royalties to any third party for its use of the Submission; (c) the Submission does not infringe any third party’s rights, including intellectual property rights and privacy rights; and (d) the Submission complies with these Terms of Use and all applicable laws and regulations.

EO takes no responsibility and assumes no liability for any Submission.

Arbitration

Any and all claims by you arising out of or related to the Site or your use thereof may be resolved only through a binding arbitration proceeding to be conducted under the auspices of the Commercial Arbitration Rules of the American Arbitration Association in Montgomery County, Pennsylvania. Both your agreement to arbitrate all controversies, disputes and claims, and the results and awards rendered through the arbitration, will be final and binding on you and may be specifically enforced by legal proceedings. Arbitration will be the sole means of resolving such controversies, disputes and claims, and you waive your rights to resolve such controversies, disputes and claims by court proceedings or any other means. You agree that judgment may be entered on the award in any court of competent jurisdiction and, therefore, any award rendered shall be binding. The arbitrator may not consolidate more than one person’s claims, and may not otherwise preside over any form of a representative or class proceeding. You understand that by agreeing to arbitration as a mechanism to resolve all controversies, disputes and claims between us, you are waiving certain rights, including the right to bring an action in court, the right to a jury trial, the right to broad discovery, and the right to an appeal. You understand that in the context of arbitration, a case is decided by an arbitrator (one or more), not by a judge or a jury.

International Use

The Site is controlled, operated, and administered by EO from offices within the United States of America and is only intended for use therein. We make no representation regarding use of the Site outside of the United States.

Other Terms

If, for any reason, our Terms of Use, Privacy Policy, or any portion thereof to be unenforceable, such provision shall be enforced to the maximum extent permissible so as to give the intended effect thereof, and the remainder of these Terms of Use and Privacy Policy shall continue in full force and effect. EO’s failure to act with respect to a breach by you or others does not waive our right to act with respect to that breach or subsequent or similar breaches. No consent or waiver by EO hereof will be deemed effective unless in writing. These Terms of Use, together with our Privacy Policy, as each is currently posted, constitute the entire agreement between EO and you with respect to your use of the Site and supersede all previous written or oral agreements relating to the subject matter hereof, that this agreement shall not supersede, restrict, or replace any agreements governing the attorney-client relationship between EO and EO Clients.

EO may, in its sole discretion and without prior notice, block and/or terminate your access to the Site and if we determine that you have violated these Terms of Use or other terms or agreements or that may be associated therewith or if you use the Site in a way that we deem, in our sole discretion, to be an unacceptable use.

Get Your Free Case Review

Find out if you qualify for compensation and learn your next steps – no cost, no obligation, just expert legal guidance.

Disclaimer: By submitting the form above and checking the consent box, you agree to our conditions and privacy policy and permit Ethen Ostroff Law to contact you via text messages, phone calls. Standard message rates may apply.