LINCOLN, Neb. (DTN) -- Butler, Missouri, farmer Jared Wilson filed an objection to a proposed $99 million settlement in a class action, right-to-repair lawsuit against John Deere, telling a federal court the proposal provides inadequate relief to farmers.

Wilson, who had been class representative and a lead plaintiff in the case, asked the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois to reject the preliminary settlement, citing numerous reasons for his objection. Farmers have until Sept. 14, 2026, to file objections.

"The bottom line is this proposal is fundamentally flawed," Wilson told DTN.

"I have objected to the settlement agreement with Deere because it's not a serious proposal. The monetary relief will amount to pennies per acre after the lawyers take their cut and it doesn't account for parts or lost crops. Despite our machines lasting for decades this settlement only spans 10 years. This is the blink of an eye in agriculture."

After attorney's fees of about $45 million, administrative costs of $6 million and incentive awards of $175,000, Wilson said in his objection the net settlement fund could shrink to about $48 million.

"That means that the average recovery would be approximately $240 to $395 per claimant before variations under the plan of allocation," according to the objection.

"For an average farm of approximately 470 acres, that equals $0.51 to $0.84 per acre. A check for that amount would likely fail to cover the cost of a single authorized dealer service call."

When reached for comment, John Deere referred DTN to an April 6, 2026, statement from Denver Caldwell, vice president, aftermarket and customer support: "As we continue to innovate industry leading equipment and technology solutions supported by our world-class dealer network, we are equally committed to providing customers and other service providers with access to repair resources. We're pleased that this resolution allows us to move forward and remain focused on what matters most -- serving our customers."

Class counsel did not respond to DTN's request for comment.

PRELIMINARY APPROVAL

The court in May 2026 granted preliminary approval to Deere's proposed settlement to resolve numerous farmer-initiated lawsuits filed in 2022. Those lawsuits alleged the company monopolized the repair market by limiting farmers' access to diagnostic tools for equipment they own.

In addition, the objection said the payouts represent just 4.1% to 13.9% of the full range of damages estimated by the class counsel's own expert.

Wilson's objection said the proposal would make payouts based on labor hours from repair invoices.

However, he told the court Deere dealer invoices do not itemize labor hours and instead show just dollar amounts.

"The settlement agreement's injunctive relief contains significant loopholes, carveouts and omissions that permit Deere to unilaterally narrow the scope of the relief it purports to provide," Wilson's objection said.

"Rather than ensuring competitive parity between Deere dealers, independent repair providers and equipment owners, the agreement preserves multiple mechanisms through which Deere can maintain control over repair markets, restrict access to critical resources and render the settlement agreement ineffectual."

WILSON ALLEGES LOOPHOLES

One of the alleged loopholes Wilson identifies is that Deere would not have to make future repair tools available to independent repair shops until more than 50% of Deere dealer locations have them.

In addition, Wilson tells the court one "glaring omission" from the damages calculation is farmers' lost crops and harvests. Wilson said farmers often wait for days for dealer technicians to perform needed services.

"Mr. Wilson could not install it himself as the process requires re-flashing the ECU (electronic control unit) to accept the part," Wilson's objection said about a particular repair on his farm.

"During the four-day wait for the part, the dry weather caused harvest-ready soybean pods to pop open, leading Mr. Wilson to lose nearly $30,000 worth of crops while his Deere equipment sat idle."

In addition, Wilson's objection said the proposed settlement would not prevent similar actions by Deere in the future.

"Because the monetary payment in the settlement reflects only a negligible fraction of the monopolistic repair-related profits Deere allegedly obtained over the class period," Wilson said, "the proposed settlement creates vanishingly little economic consequence or incentive to change the underlying conduct."

DROPPED AS REPRESENTATIVE

Wilson, who owns and operates Wilson Farms Land and Cattle Co. LLC, a 3,100-acre corn and soybean operation, signed a representation agreement with the class counsel in January 2022.

Wilson told the court he was dropped as the class representative, or lead plaintiff, after objecting to class counsel about the proposal before it was filed with the court.

Wilson made his objections to the settlement known in October 2025, according to the objection, and counsel became "adversarial" toward him.

After Wilson formally opposed the settlement in a letter to counsel in March 2026, the objection said, counsel removed him as a class representative.

"Curiously, however, class counsel have yet to file a motion with the court to withdraw as Wilson Farm's attorneys in this action," Wilson said in the objection.

Wilson's objection stated he would be filing a supplemental brief in the next 10 days or so, addressing concerns about counsel representation in the settlement.

Read more about the settlement here, https://www.dtnpf.com/….

Todd Neeley can be reached at todd.neeley@dtn.com

Follow him on social platform X @DTNeeley

(c) Copyright 2026 DTN, LLC. All rights reserved.