Proudly Serving Clients Throughout Arkansas

Free Consultations Available


We Are Prepared to Handle Any Challenge That Comes Our Way

Largest Verdict In Arkansas History

"Largest Verdict In State History"

– As reported by KATV, Channel 7, Little Rock, AR

Genetically Modified Rice Verdict – Riceland V. Bayer

Background: Riceland Foods, Inc., the world’s largest rice mill, based in Stuttgart, AR, brought a lawsuit against Bayer CropScience AG and affiliated Bayer entities for damages to Riceland’s business resulting from contamination of the U.S. long grain rice supply with genetically modified rice. The suit was filed in Arkansas state court in Stuttgart, Ar. and Barry Deacon of the Deacon Law Firm was the lead trial attorney for Riceland during this five year litigation process.

Claim: The USDA announced the finding of the contamination on Aug. 18, 2006 and Riceland claimed Bayer failed to properly contain its Liberty Link rice thereby allowing the genetically modified rice to escape and contaminate the U.S. commercial rice supply. This caused significant export markets such as the European Union, and others, to stop purchasing U.S. rice which resulted in lost profits and increased costs to Riceland.

Verdict: An Arkansas County jury held that Bayer acted negligently and awarded Riceland $16.9 million in compensatory damages and an additional $125 million in punitive damages against Bayer. The verdict awarded in this monumental case was reported by news sources as the “largest in state history”.

National Law, Top 100 Verdicts

This jury verdict was also listed in The Litigation Annual Report

of the National Law Journal and Legal Times as the

14th largest verdict in the US during 2011.

14th Largest Verdict in the US during 2011

Top 100 Verdicts in the U.S. link: /documents/top2011verdicts.pdf

See additional news articles related to this historic verdict:

DISCLAIMER: This case is shown for informational purposes only. No two cases are exactly alike. Every case has its own specific factual and legal circumstances and must be adjudicated on its own merits. The information provided concerning outcomes in this case is not a guarantee or suggestion of future results. See full disclaimer.