{"id":5339,"date":"2017-11-20T01:43:58","date_gmt":"2017-11-20T07:43:58","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/agrilife.org\/texasaglaw\/?p=5339"},"modified":"2017-11-30T13:37:41","modified_gmt":"2017-11-30T19:37:41","slug":"dicamba-update-part-ii","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/agrilife.org\/texasaglaw\/2017\/11\/20\/dicamba-update-part-ii\/","title":{"rendered":"Dicamba Update (Part II)"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>If you missed Part I in this series, <a href=\"https:\/\/agrilife.org\/texasaglaw\/2017\/11\/13\/dicamba-update\/\">click here<\/a>.<\/p>\n<p><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\"aligncenter wp-image-5281\" src=\"https:\/\/agrilife.org\/texasaglaw\/files\/2017\/10\/soybean-field-1610754_1280.jpg\" alt=\"\" width=\"450\" height=\"338\" srcset=\"https:\/\/agrilife.org\/texasaglaw\/files\/2017\/10\/soybean-field-1610754_1280.jpg 1280w, https:\/\/agrilife.org\/texasaglaw\/files\/2017\/10\/soybean-field-1610754_1280-300x225.jpg 300w, https:\/\/agrilife.org\/texasaglaw\/files\/2017\/10\/soybean-field-1610754_1280-768x576.jpg 768w, https:\/\/agrilife.org\/texasaglaw\/files\/2017\/10\/soybean-field-1610754_1280-1024x768.jpg 1024w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 450px) 100vw, 450px\" \/><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: center;\"><strong>Lawsuits Begin Rolling In<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>A number of lawsuits have been filed across the country related to these issues.\u00a0 Several cases involve claims by farmers against Monsanto, BASF, and\/or DuPont alleging that Monsanto violated the law by releasing their genetically modified seeds without an accompanying herbicide and that the companies should have reasonably foreseen that seed purchasers would illegally apply off-label, older dicamba formulations, resulting in drift damage.\u00a0 Others claim that the new herbicide products are unreasonably dangerous and have caused harm even when applicators followed all instructions provided by law.<\/p>\n<p>Here are quick summaries of some of the pending lawsuits:<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li><em>Landers v. Monsanto Co.<\/em>, No. 1:17-cv-20, was filed in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri and focuses on injuries suffered in 2015 and 2016, prior to approval of the new dicamba herbicides.\u00a0 Plaintiffs seek to represent a nationwide class of farmers who have &#8220;been victimized by Monsanto&#8217;s defective Xtend seed system and its purchasers&#8217; inevitable use of dicamba, a drift-prone herbicide&#8230;&#8221;\u00a0 \u00a0Essentially, the Plaintiffs claim that Monsanto sold dicamba-tolerant seeds in 2015 and 2016, knowing that farmers would not be able to purchase their corresponding XtendiMax herbicide as it had not been approved by the EPA.\u00a0 Monsanto should have known, they argue, that this would result in farmers applying older, highly volatile versions of dicamba, resulting in damage to neighboring crops and Monsanto should be held liable for this damage. [Read Complaint <a href=\"https:\/\/agrilife.org\/texasaglaw\/files\/2017\/03\/Complaint-here.pdf\">here<\/a>].\u00a0 The Judge dismissed the Civil Conspiracy and Unjust Enrichment claims, but allowed numerous other claims to go forward.<\/li>\n<li><em>Whitehead Farms v. Monsanto &amp; BASF<\/em>, No. CV-2017-40.\u00a0 This case involves a proposed class of all Arkansas residents who farm in the state and have documented dicamba drift on their farms.\u00a0 It was filed in Arkansas state court and alleges that Monsanto and BASF conspired together to sell dicamba tolerant seeds in 2015 and 2016, knowing there was no EPA-approved dicamba herbicide available for these crops.\u00a0 This resulted in harm to the Plaintiffs&#8217; farms when neighbors planted the tolerant seeds and applied an older version of dicamba off-label to the growing crops. [Read Complaint <a href=\"https:\/\/agrilife.org\/texasaglaw\/files\/2017\/11\/here.pdf\">here<\/a>].<\/li>\n<li><em>Bruce Farms v. Monsanto &amp; BASF,<\/em> No. 3:17-cv-000154-DPM<em>.\u00a0\u00a0<\/em>Filed in Arkansas federal court, this case involves a proposed nationwide class of &#8220;all agriculture farmers and entities who raise non-dicamba-tolerant crops and suffered damage to those crops as a result of Defendants&#8217; conspiracy and wrongful conduct&#8230;&#8221;\u00a0 They allege that by marketing a &#8220;cropping system&#8221; in 2016, but releasing only the seeds and not the corresponding herbicide, Monsanto and BASF violated the law, resulting in drift damage to the class when other dicamba products were applied to the tolerant seeds.\u00a0 [Read Complaint <a href=\"https:\/\/agrilife.org\/texasaglaw\/files\/2017\/11\/here-2.pdf\">here<\/a>.]<\/li>\n<li><em>Bader v. Monsanto<\/em>, No. 1:16-cv-00299, is an individual case filed in Missouri federal court.\u00a0 The Plaintiff is a peach farmer whose orchard was damaged by dicamba in 2015 and 2016.\u00a0 He alleges that Monsanto should be liable for its &#8220;willful and negligent release of a defective crop system [the Xtend seeds] without an accompanying, EPA-approved dicamba herbicide.&#8221;\u00a0 The Plaintiff argues it was foreseeable that a farmer who planted the Xtend seeds would turn to an older, more volatile, unapproved dicamba product to spray his growing crop.\u00a0 [Read Complaint\u00a0<a href=\"https:\/\/agrilife.org\/texasaglaw\/files\/2017\/11\/here-1.pdf\">here].<\/a><\/li>\n<li><em>Smokey Alley Farm v. Monsanto, BASF, &amp; DuPont<\/em>.\u00a0 Plaintiffs in this proposed class action, filed in Missouri federal court, seek to represent a\u00a0 nationwide class (or numerous state classes)\u00a0of\u00a0farmers who suffered damaged crops or plants due to dicamba drift or volatilization when dicamba was sprayed on Xtend products.\u00a0 The lawsuit alleges that the companies should not have released seeds without corresponding herbicides, but also alleges that &#8220;Monsanto seed representatives instructed farmers&#8230;to illegally spray their fields with dicamba.&#8221;\u00a0 Additionally, they claim that when the herbicides were rolled out in 2017, they were harmful and resulted in damage to neighboring crops even when the label was followed by the applicator.\u00a0 Finally, they\u00a0 also take an anti-trust approach, alleging that dicamba damage actually helps increase sales of the genetically modified dicamba-tolerant seeds because farmers may feel the need to defensively plant in case drift were to occur.\u00a0 [View Complaint\u00a0<a href=\"https:\/\/agrilife.org\/texasaglaw\/files\/2017\/11\/here..pdf\">here.]<\/a><\/li>\n<li><em>Claassen Farms v. Monsanto &amp; BASF<\/em>, 6:17-cv-01210.\u00a0 This case was filed in Kansas federal court and seeks to represent a nationwide class of farmers whose crops were damaged by dicamba in 2016 and 2017.\u00a0 They allege that BASF and Monsanto &#8220;jointly collaborated to develop and release a defective and unreasonably dangerous dicamba-tolerant crop system.&#8221;\u00a0 They seek damages both for the 2016 harm, allegedly caused by Defendant&#8217;s failure to release the corresponding herbicides, and for 2017 harm, allegedly caused by the volatility and damages caused by the corresponding herbicides which were released by that time.\u00a0 [Read\u00a0<a href=\"https:\/\/agrilife.org\/texasaglaw\/files\/2017\/11\/Complaint-here.-1.pdf\">Complaint here].<\/a><\/li>\n<li><em>B&amp;L Farms v. Monsanto &amp; BASF,\u00a0<\/em>No. 2:17-cv-00122-BRW.\u00a0 Plaintiffs\u00a0are Arkansas soybean farmers seeking to represent a nationwide class of &#8220;all persons or entities who purchased Dicamba and\/or Dicamba-tolerant seeds for use during the 2017 crop year designed, developed, marketed, distributed or sold by Defendants.&#8221;\u00a0 The farmers argue that they paid a premium, including a tech fee, for the purchase of dicamba-tolerant seeds and were promised a rebate when they purchased the corresponding herbicide product in 2017.\u00a0 They allege that damage caused by dicamba drift in 2016 &#8220;caused farmers to plant dicamba-tolerant seeds in a defensive posture for the 2017 growing season.&#8221;\u00a0 They claim that due to the drift issues surrounding dicamba and the Arkansas ban on the products, they are unable to use the herbicides, could not benefit from the technology they paid a premium to receive, and were unable to receive the rebate that they were promised.\u00a0 [Read\u00a0<a href=\"https:\/\/agrilife.org\/texasaglaw\/files\/2017\/11\/Complaint-here.pdf\">Complaint here<\/a>].<\/li>\n<li><em>Warren Farms v. Monsanto, BASF, &amp; DuPont<\/em>, No. 3:17-cv-00973.\u00a0 This individual case filed in Illinois federal court by a pumpkin and soybean farmer who suffered dicamba drift claims that defendants &#8220;misrepresented that their formulations of dicamba could be used safely without causing harm to others through off-target movement.&#8221;\u00a0 Further, they allege that concern over off-target dicamba damage &#8220;was a major driver of sales for Xtend crops leading up to the 2017 growing season.&#8221;\u00a0 [Read\u00a0<a href=\"https:\/\/agrilife.org\/texasaglaw\/files\/2017\/11\/Complaint-here-1.pdf\">Complaint here<\/a>.]<\/li>\n<li>There are also criminal charges for murder pending in Arkansas where farmer Mike Wallace was allegedly shot and killed by an employee of a neighboring farm due to a dispute over dicamba drift after Wallace reported drift to the Arkansas Plant Board.\u00a0 [Listen to NPR Podcast <a href=\"https:\/\/www.npr.org\/sections\/money\/2017\/06\/02\/531272125\/episode-775-the-pigweed-killer\">here<\/a>.]<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p style=\"text-align: center;\"><strong>Monsanto Suit Against Arkansas Plant Board<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Monsanto has filed a lawsuit of its own against the Arkansas Plant Board.\u00a0 The lawsuit, filed October 20 in Arkansas State Court claims that the Plant Board&#8217;s ban on Monsanto&#8217;s XtendiMax herbicide is &#8220;ultra vires, arbitrary, capricious, and otherwise unlawful act not based on substantial evidence.&#8221;\u00a0 Monsanto claims that they have been treated differently than other pesticide companies (like BASF) and that the Plant Board has imposed an &#8220;unwritten requirement&#8221; that pesticide applicants must submit research to the Plant Board regarding their products, and only research conducted by scientists at the University of Arkansas will meet this requirement.\u00a0 This requirement, argues Monsanto, is not written, has not been applied to other companies, and violates the Interstate Commerce Clause.\u00a0 [Read article <a href=\"http:\/\/www.reuters.com\/article\/us-usa-pesticides-monsanto\/monsanto-sues-arkansas-over-proposed-herbicide-limits-idUSKBN1CP2PU\">here <\/a>and <a href=\"https:\/\/agrilife.org\/texasaglaw\/files\/2017\/11\/Complaint-here..pdf\">Complaint here.<\/a>].<\/p>\n<p>Additionally, Monsanto also claims bias on the part of Terry Fuller, a member of the Arkansas Plant Board.\u00a0 The Board held a hearing on November 8, 2017 to determine whether or not to recommend that farmers will be able to use dicamba in 2018, which formulations will be allowed, and when any cut-off dates may be.\u00a0 In advance of that meeting, Fuller, sent emails to farmers around the state asking them to attend the meeting or, if unable to attend, to send a letter (of which he included fill-in-the-blank samples stating support for a ban on Dicamba after April 16) to the Board.\u00a0 Monsanto claims this is clear evidence that Fuller has pre-judged the facts and seeks to tip the public comments in favor of his decision.\u00a0 Fuller says that he sees this as part of his job representing growers on the Board.\u00a0 [Read article <a href=\"http:\/\/www.arkansasonline.com\/news\/2017\/nov\/03\/monsanto-alleges-dicamba-bias-20171103\/\">here<\/a>.]<\/p>\n<p>At the hearing on November 8, the Plant Board unanimously stood behind Fuller and allowed him to participate in the decision-making process.\u00a0 When it came time to vote, however, Fuller recused himself.\u00a0 After hearing from several citizens (17 for the ban and 20 against), the Board voted 10-3 to recommend imposing a cut-off date of April 15 for dicamba application.\u00a0 There is an exception for\u00a0of dicamba in pastures, rangeland, turf, ornamental, direct injection for forestry, and home use.\u00a0 Additionally, potential fines for violations will be increased from $1000\/violation to $25,000 per violation.<\/p>\n<p>The proposal will now head to the executive subcommittee of the Arkansas Legislative Council and, if approved there, on to the governor to be signed into law.<\/p>\n<p>Meanwhile, a lawsuit has been filed by 6 farmers against the Plant Board, alleging that the process for selecting Board members is unconstitutional and the Board&#8217;s decision to ban dicamba after April 15 was arbitrary and capricious.\u00a0 \u00a0[Read\u00a0<a href=\"https:\/\/agrilife.org\/texasaglaw\/files\/2017\/11\/Complaint-here-3.pdf\">Complaint here<\/a> article <a href=\"http:\/\/www.arkansasonline.com\/news\/2017\/nov\/11\/farmers-sue-board-over-dicamba-curb-201\/\">here<\/a>.]<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: center;\"><strong>Insurance Issues<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>There are been a number of articles in the news recently discussing insurance and dicamba drift.\u00a0 Of course, drift damage is not covered by the damaged farmer&#8217;s crop insurance policy.\u00a0 Generally, injured producers look to the applicator&#8217;s liability insurance policy for compensation.\u00a0 Stories have reported that these claims have been denied for several reasons.\u00a0 First, claims may be denied if the insurance company determines that their applicator did nothing wrong.\u00a0 For example, if an applicator somehow violated the label by spraying with wind speeds that were too high or too low or using the wrong nozzle, the insurance company would likely cover that.\u00a0 If, however, the applicator followed all of the rules, acted reasonably, and there is no evidence of wrongdoing, yet damage occurred, a company may deny coverage.\u00a0 Second, on the other end of the spectrum, companies will deny claims if they determine their insured knowingly violated the law or the label when applying pesticides.\u00a0 Third, coverage may be denied due to lack of proof of causation&#8211;it may be difficult for the injured farmer to prove exactly who caused the crop damage, particularly if numerous neighbors all applied dicamba.\u00a0 Finally, concerns have been vocalized that insurance premiums for policies covering spray drift could dramatically increase as a result of the ongoing issues.\u00a0 [Read a great article on insurance coverage issues <a href=\"https:\/\/www.dtnpf.com\/agriculture\/web\/ag\/news\/article\/2017\/10\/20\/insurance-claims-denied-companies\">here.<\/a>]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>If you missed Part I in this series, click here. Lawsuits Begin Rolling In A number of lawsuits have been filed across the country related to these issues.\u00a0 Several cases involve claims by farmers against Monsanto, BASF, and\/or DuPont alleging that Monsanto violated the law by releasing their genetically modified seeds without an accompanying herbicide and that the companies should have reasonably foreseen that seed purchasers would illegally apply off-label, older dicamba formulations, resulting in drift damage.\u00a0 Others claim that the new herbicide products are unreasonably dangerous and&#8230; <span class=\"read-more\"><a href=\"https:\/\/agrilife.org\/texasaglaw\/2017\/11\/20\/dicamba-update-part-ii\/\">Read More &rarr;<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":908,"featured_media":5281,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"_monsterinsights_skip_tracking":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_active":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_note":"","_monsterinsights_sitenote_category":0,"footnotes":""},"categories":[67,52],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-5339","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-dicamba","category-pesticide-drift"],"acf":[],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.3 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Dicamba Update (Part II) - Texas Agriculture Law<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/agrilife.org\/texasaglaw\/2017\/11\/20\/dicamba-update-part-ii\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Dicamba Update (Part II) - Texas Agriculture Law\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"If you missed Part I in this series, click here. Lawsuits Begin Rolling In A number of lawsuits have been filed across the country related to these issues.\u00a0 Several cases involve claims by farmers against Monsanto, BASF, and\/or DuPont alleging that Monsanto violated the law by releasing their genetically modified seeds without an accompanying herbicide and that the companies should have reasonably foreseen that seed purchasers would illegally apply off-label, older dicamba formulations, resulting in drift damage.\u00a0 Others claim that the new herbicide products are unreasonably dangerous and... Read More &rarr;\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/agrilife.org\/texasaglaw\/2017\/11\/20\/dicamba-update-part-ii\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Texas Agriculture Law\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/texasaglaw\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2017-11-20T07:43:58+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2017-11-30T19:37:41+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/agrilife.org\/texasaglaw\/files\/2017\/10\/soybean-field-1610754_1280.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"1280\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"960\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"tiffany.dowell\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@tiffdowell\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@tiffdowell\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"tiffany.dowell\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"9 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":[\"Article\",\"BlogPosting\"],\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/agrilife.org\\\/texasaglaw\\\/2017\\\/11\\\/20\\\/dicamba-update-part-ii\\\/#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/agrilife.org\\\/texasaglaw\\\/2017\\\/11\\\/20\\\/dicamba-update-part-ii\\\/\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"tiffany.dowell\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/agrilife.org\\\/texasaglaw\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/5a74ee89edef25309731e344599924ee\"},\"headline\":\"Dicamba Update (Part II)\",\"datePublished\":\"2017-11-20T07:43:58+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-11-30T19:37:41+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/agrilife.org\\\/texasaglaw\\\/2017\\\/11\\\/20\\\/dicamba-update-part-ii\\\/\"},\"wordCount\":1712,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/agrilife.org\\\/texasaglaw\\\/#organization\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/agrilife.org\\\/texasaglaw\\\/2017\\\/11\\\/20\\\/dicamba-update-part-ii\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/agrilife.org\\\/texasaglaw\\\/files\\\/2017\\\/10\\\/soybean-field-1610754_1280.jpg\",\"articleSection\":[\"Dicamba\",\"Pesticide Drift\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/agrilife.org\\\/texasaglaw\\\/2017\\\/11\\\/20\\\/dicamba-update-part-ii\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/agrilife.org\\\/texasaglaw\\\/2017\\\/11\\\/20\\\/dicamba-update-part-ii\\\/\",\"name\":\"Dicamba Update (Part II) - Texas Agriculture Law\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/agrilife.org\\\/texasaglaw\\\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/agrilife.org\\\/texasaglaw\\\/2017\\\/11\\\/20\\\/dicamba-update-part-ii\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/agrilife.org\\\/texasaglaw\\\/2017\\\/11\\\/20\\\/dicamba-update-part-ii\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/agrilife.org\\\/texasaglaw\\\/files\\\/2017\\\/10\\\/soybean-field-1610754_1280.jpg\",\"datePublished\":\"2017-11-20T07:43:58+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-11-30T19:37:41+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/agrilife.org\\\/texasaglaw\\\/2017\\\/11\\\/20\\\/dicamba-update-part-ii\\\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/agrilife.org\\\/texasaglaw\\\/2017\\\/11\\\/20\\\/dicamba-update-part-ii\\\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/agrilife.org\\\/texasaglaw\\\/2017\\\/11\\\/20\\\/dicamba-update-part-ii\\\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/agrilife.org\\\/texasaglaw\\\/files\\\/2017\\\/10\\\/soybean-field-1610754_1280.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/agrilife.org\\\/texasaglaw\\\/files\\\/2017\\\/10\\\/soybean-field-1610754_1280.jpg\",\"width\":1280,\"height\":960},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/agrilife.org\\\/texasaglaw\\\/2017\\\/11\\\/20\\\/dicamba-update-part-ii\\\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/agrilife.org\\\/texasaglaw\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Dicamba Update (Part II)\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/agrilife.org\\\/texasaglaw\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/agrilife.org\\\/texasaglaw\\\/\",\"name\":\"Texas Agriculture Law\",\"description\":\"Teaching, Research, Extension and Service\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/agrilife.org\\\/texasaglaw\\\/#organization\"},\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/agrilife.org\\\/texasaglaw\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/agrilife.org\\\/texasaglaw\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Texas Agriculture Law\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/agrilife.org\\\/texasaglaw\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/agrilife.org\\\/texasaglaw\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/agrilife.org\\\/texasaglaw\\\/files\\\/2023\\\/12\\\/TZIFRg5K_400x400.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/agrilife.org\\\/texasaglaw\\\/files\\\/2023\\\/12\\\/TZIFRg5K_400x400.jpg\",\"width\":400,\"height\":400,\"caption\":\"Texas Agriculture Law\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/agrilife.org\\\/texasaglaw\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/texasaglaw\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/tiffdowell\",\"https:\\\/\\\/www.linkedin.com\\\/in\\\/tiffany-dowell-lashmet-0a718778\\\/\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/agrilife.org\\\/texasaglaw\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/5a74ee89edef25309731e344599924ee\",\"name\":\"tiffany.dowell\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/agrilife.org\\\/texasaglaw\\\/author\\\/tiffany-dowell\\\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Dicamba Update (Part II) - Texas Agriculture Law","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/agrilife.org\/texasaglaw\/2017\/11\/20\/dicamba-update-part-ii\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Dicamba Update (Part II) - Texas Agriculture Law","og_description":"If you missed Part I in this series, click here. Lawsuits Begin Rolling In A number of lawsuits have been filed across the country related to these issues.\u00a0 Several cases involve claims by farmers against Monsanto, BASF, and\/or DuPont alleging that Monsanto violated the law by releasing their genetically modified seeds without an accompanying herbicide and that the companies should have reasonably foreseen that seed purchasers would illegally apply off-label, older dicamba formulations, resulting in drift damage.\u00a0 Others claim that the new herbicide products are unreasonably dangerous and... Read More &rarr;","og_url":"https:\/\/agrilife.org\/texasaglaw\/2017\/11\/20\/dicamba-update-part-ii\/","og_site_name":"Texas Agriculture Law","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/texasaglaw","article_published_time":"2017-11-20T07:43:58+00:00","article_modified_time":"2017-11-30T19:37:41+00:00","og_image":[{"width":1280,"height":960,"url":"https:\/\/agrilife.org\/texasaglaw\/files\/2017\/10\/soybean-field-1610754_1280.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"tiffany.dowell","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@tiffdowell","twitter_site":"@tiffdowell","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"tiffany.dowell","Est. reading time":"9 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":["Article","BlogPosting"],"@id":"https:\/\/agrilife.org\/texasaglaw\/2017\/11\/20\/dicamba-update-part-ii\/#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/agrilife.org\/texasaglaw\/2017\/11\/20\/dicamba-update-part-ii\/"},"author":{"name":"tiffany.dowell","@id":"https:\/\/agrilife.org\/texasaglaw\/#\/schema\/person\/5a74ee89edef25309731e344599924ee"},"headline":"Dicamba Update (Part II)","datePublished":"2017-11-20T07:43:58+00:00","dateModified":"2017-11-30T19:37:41+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/agrilife.org\/texasaglaw\/2017\/11\/20\/dicamba-update-part-ii\/"},"wordCount":1712,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/agrilife.org\/texasaglaw\/#organization"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/agrilife.org\/texasaglaw\/2017\/11\/20\/dicamba-update-part-ii\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/agrilife.org\/texasaglaw\/files\/2017\/10\/soybean-field-1610754_1280.jpg","articleSection":["Dicamba","Pesticide Drift"],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/agrilife.org\/texasaglaw\/2017\/11\/20\/dicamba-update-part-ii\/","url":"https:\/\/agrilife.org\/texasaglaw\/2017\/11\/20\/dicamba-update-part-ii\/","name":"Dicamba Update (Part II) - Texas Agriculture Law","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/agrilife.org\/texasaglaw\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/agrilife.org\/texasaglaw\/2017\/11\/20\/dicamba-update-part-ii\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/agrilife.org\/texasaglaw\/2017\/11\/20\/dicamba-update-part-ii\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/agrilife.org\/texasaglaw\/files\/2017\/10\/soybean-field-1610754_1280.jpg","datePublished":"2017-11-20T07:43:58+00:00","dateModified":"2017-11-30T19:37:41+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/agrilife.org\/texasaglaw\/2017\/11\/20\/dicamba-update-part-ii\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/agrilife.org\/texasaglaw\/2017\/11\/20\/dicamba-update-part-ii\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/agrilife.org\/texasaglaw\/2017\/11\/20\/dicamba-update-part-ii\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/agrilife.org\/texasaglaw\/files\/2017\/10\/soybean-field-1610754_1280.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/agrilife.org\/texasaglaw\/files\/2017\/10\/soybean-field-1610754_1280.jpg","width":1280,"height":960},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/agrilife.org\/texasaglaw\/2017\/11\/20\/dicamba-update-part-ii\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/agrilife.org\/texasaglaw\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Dicamba Update (Part II)"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/agrilife.org\/texasaglaw\/#website","url":"https:\/\/agrilife.org\/texasaglaw\/","name":"Texas Agriculture Law","description":"Teaching, Research, Extension and Service","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/agrilife.org\/texasaglaw\/#organization"},"potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/agrilife.org\/texasaglaw\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/agrilife.org\/texasaglaw\/#organization","name":"Texas Agriculture Law","url":"https:\/\/agrilife.org\/texasaglaw\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/agrilife.org\/texasaglaw\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/agrilife.org\/texasaglaw\/files\/2023\/12\/TZIFRg5K_400x400.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/agrilife.org\/texasaglaw\/files\/2023\/12\/TZIFRg5K_400x400.jpg","width":400,"height":400,"caption":"Texas Agriculture Law"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/agrilife.org\/texasaglaw\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/texasaglaw","https:\/\/x.com\/tiffdowell","https:\/\/www.linkedin.com\/in\/tiffany-dowell-lashmet-0a718778\/"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/agrilife.org\/texasaglaw\/#\/schema\/person\/5a74ee89edef25309731e344599924ee","name":"tiffany.dowell","url":"https:\/\/agrilife.org\/texasaglaw\/author\/tiffany-dowell\/"}]}},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/agrilife.org\/texasaglaw\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5339","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/agrilife.org\/texasaglaw\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/agrilife.org\/texasaglaw\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/agrilife.org\/texasaglaw\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/908"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/agrilife.org\/texasaglaw\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=5339"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/agrilife.org\/texasaglaw\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5339\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/agrilife.org\/texasaglaw\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/5281"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/agrilife.org\/texasaglaw\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=5339"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/agrilife.org\/texasaglaw\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=5339"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/agrilife.org\/texasaglaw\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=5339"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}