Holding companies accountable is essential in protecting consumers from dangerous products. When companies neglect their duty to ensure safety, innocent people suffer serious injuries or even lose their lives. Famous product liability cases serve as reminders that companies must be responsible for the quality and safety of their products.
These landmark product liability cases have shaped and reshaped legal trends and consumer protections over the years. They have spurred important changes in industry standards, influencing everything from manufacturing practices to regulatory oversight.
If you have any questions about defective product claims or want to discuss a potential case, a product liability attorney from Rosenfeld Injury Lawyers is here to help.
Notable Product Liability Lawsuits
Product liability lawsuits arise when a faulty product causes severe adverse side effects that were not properly disclosed or tested. In many product liability cases, these lawsuits point to misleading marketing tactics that make faulty products appear safer or more effective than they really are.
Additionally, inadequate warnings or instructions can leave consumers unaware of potential risks. When companies fail to alert users about possible dangers, they put lives at risk. Through these legal actions, victims seek accountability and push companies to adhere to higher safety standards.
Suboxone
Suboxone, a medication used to treat opioid use disorder, has faced several legal challenges due to its association with serious dental issues. Various lawsuits claim that the manufacturer failed to adequately warn users about the risks of severe dental problems, such as tooth decay, enamel erosion, and eventual tooth loss.
These allegations form the basis of multiple product liability claims and class action lawsuits, where victims seek compensatory damages for the medical bills, lost wages, punitive damages, and other impacts resulting from these hidden defects.
In an effort to streamline pretrial proceedings, over 890 Suboxone-related product liability lawsuits have been consolidated into a multidistrict litigation (MDL) in the Northern District of Ohio as of February 2025.
While no final settlement has been reached yet, individual settlements have been estimated to range from $25,000 to over $150,000, depending on the severity of the dental injuries and personal losses suffered.
Ozempic
Ozempic, a medication developed by Novo Nordisk for managing Type 2 diabetes and used off-label for weight loss, has come under scrutiny for causing serious health complications. Recent lawsuits allege that the drug, a GLP-1 receptor agonist, leads to severe injuries.
In February 2024, the U.S. Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation consolidated over 55 Ozempic lawsuits into MDL No. 3094. This step was taken to centralize product liability cases that claim injuries stem from Ozempic use and related medications.
These cases involve claims of injuries such as gastroparesis (stomach paralysis), extended hospitalization due to gastrointestinal issues, esophageal injury requiring surgery, ileus or bowel obstruction, sudden vision loss (nonarteritic anterior ischemic optic neuropathy or NAION), deep vein thrombosis and related complications (including death), pulmonary aspiration, and gallbladder injuries in patients who began taking the drug before 2022.
While no specific settlement figures have been confirmed yet, estimates suggest that severe cases could result in settlements ranging from $400,000 to $700,000. These amounts reflect the significant health complications and the impact of these injuries on patients’ lives.
Depo-Provera
Pfizer and its subsidiaries, including Greenstone and Prasco, are the main defendants in this lawsuit related to Depo-Provera – a well-known and commonly used type of birth control. Plaintiffs argue that the company knowingly sold a faulty product that failed to warn consumers about its hidden defects and severe health risks.
A study linking the drug to dangerous brain tumors (meningiomas) has strengthened the product liability claim, giving rise to Depo-Provera lawsuits combined in an MDL that seeks compensatory and a request for defendants to pay punitive damages.
Apart from the risk of meningiomas, Depo-Provera users face additional dangers, such as bone density loss, blood clots, weight gain, and other serious injuries.
Women who developed brain tumors and sustained bodily damage claim that the company failed to warn consumers about these adverse side effects, leading to significant compensatory damage, including lost wages, medical bills, and pain and suffering.
A decision regarding where the Depo-Provera class action lawsuit will be heard is pending as of February 2025.
To date, there haven’t been any payouts in the Depo-Provera lawsuit, and victims are still waiting for compensation as the litigation progresses.
Settlement values in these cases may vary significantly based on the specifics of each diagnosis. For many of these product liability claims, Depo-Provera settlements could range from $200,000 to $500,000 for those diagnosed with lower-grade meningiomas.
The key factor is the tumor’s grade, with Grade III (malignant) cases, which involve life-threatening complications, potentially generating compensation that exceeds $1 million when taking into account compensatory and punitive damages.
Zantac
The Zantac lawsuits center on claims that the popular heartburn medication contains a carcinogen called NDMA, which is linked to increasing the risk of several cancers.
These cases have sparked widespread attention as consumers argue that using Zantac for an extended period has led to severe health complications such as bladder, liver, kidney, and stomach cancers.
The product liability suit names defendants such as Boehringer Ingelheim Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (a subsidiary of Boehringer Ingelheim Corporation), Sanofi US Services Inc., a wholly owned subsidiary of Sanofi S.A., Pfizer, and GlaxoSmithKline.
In October 2024, GlaxoSmithKline (GSK) agreed to a settlement, resolving about 80,000 Zantac cases with a $2.2 billion agreement, covering roughly 93% of the product liability claims.
Thousands of the remaining cases have been consolidated into a Multidistrict Litigation (MDL). With more trials scheduled, including a retrial in Illinois concerning prostate cancer claims against Boehringer Ingelheim, the legal implications continue to evolve.
Tepezza
Tepezza, known generically as teprotumumab, is a medication approved for treating thyroid eye disease. However, lawsuits have emerged alleging that the drug can cause hearing loss and other severe side effects.
Plaintiffs claim that Horizon Therapeutics, the manufacturer, failed to properly test Tepezza before bringing it to market, did not adequately warn users about the risk of hearing loss, and engaged in misleading marketing practices.
As of February 2025, there are 203 pending Tepezza lawsuits. Bellwether trials are scheduled for 2026, which could have far-reaching implications for similar product liability claims. At this time, no settlements have been reached, leaving many victims to seek legal advice regarding the company’s potential liabilities and options for compensation.
Tylenol
The Tylenol lawsuits claim that using Tylenol during pregnancy has been linked to neurodevelopmental disorders, such as autism and ADHD, in children. Plaintiffs argue that the company failed to adequately warn consumers about these potential risks.
Johnson & Johnson, the parent company, was successful in their motions to dismiss based on federal preemption. However, plaintiffs have appealed the MDL dismissal, arguing that the court misapplied the Daubert standard and wrongly rejected expert testimony connecting Tylenol use to these serious conditions.
Tylenol lawsuits remain active as state courts continue to hear cases following the recent MDL dismissal in August 2024.
As of November 2024, plaintiffs have filed an appeal against the MDL dismissal, seeking a reevaluation of the expert evidence. In December 2024, Tylenol autism lawsuits continued to move forward in state courts while awaiting the appellate ruling.
A California lawsuit is scheduled for trial in April 2025, and additional cases are pending in California, New Jersey, Delaware, and Pennsylvania.
Families whose children were exposed to Tylenol and later diagnosed with autism or ADHD are encouraged to explore legal options and seek a free consultation with product liability lawyers. As of now, no settlements have been reached.
Zofran
The Zofran lawsuits allege that when taken during pregnancy, Zofran can cause birth defects and that GlaxoSmithKline failed to warn consumers of these risks. However, most of these claims have been dismissed, with courts ruling that federal law preempts state-level warnings and that the FDA would not have allowed a mandatory pregnancy warning on the label.
Valsartan
Valsartan, a widely prescribed blood pressure medication, faces product liability claims. These cases focus on the discovery of cancer-causing impurities that resulted from the manufacturing process in China, raising serious concerns about patient safety.
The lawsuits allege that valsartan was contaminated with harmful impurities that have been linked to cancer. Plaintiffs claim that these dangerous substances, hidden in the product, significantly increased the risk of developing certain cancers.
Plaintiffs argue that the companies neglected to properly warn consumers about the impurities, knowingly putting patients at risk. The lawsuits assert that these actions demonstrate a breach of duty, causing injury and significant bodily damage among those who relied on the medication.
All of the valsartan lawsuits have been consolidated into multidistrict litigation (MDL) in New Jersey, which helps streamline pretrial proceedings. As of February 2025, there are 1,295 pending lawsuits, with a bellwether trial scheduled for September 2025.
At this time, no jury verdicts or settlements have been reached.
Philips CPAP
The Philips CPAP lawsuit centers on allegations that the polyester-based polyurethane (PE-PUR) foam in Philips CPAP, BiPAP, and ventilator devices degrades over time, causing serious health issues.
Plaintiffs claim that the foam degradation leads to cancer, organ damage, headaches, airway irritation, and chest pressure, among other risks. Philips is being accused of failing to warn the public about these dangers despite a growing number of injury reports.
Over 105,000 medical device reports have been filed as of June 2023, with more than 500 deaths linked to the degraded PE-PUR foam. These reports include serious conditions like cancer, pneumonia, dizziness, and respiratory issues, highlighting the significant risks associated with these products.
On April 29, 2024, Philips Respironics reached a $1.1 billion settlement for CPAP lawsuits. This has $1.075 billion allocated for injury lawsuits and $25 million set aside for medical monitoring.
Despite this, as of February 2025, there are 825 pending cases in multidistrict litigation (MDL) related to these injuries. If the current settlement is not approved, bellwether trials could occur in 2025 for cases claiming that the devices caused cancer and other severe health problems.
Roundup
The Roundup lawsuits focus on claims that Monsanto failed to warn consumers about the health risks associated with its popular herbicide. Individuals allege that Roundup’s weed killer active ingredient, glyphosate, could lead people to develop non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma and other conditions, like multiple myeloma, B-cell lymphoma, and other health issues.
These product liability claims assert that Monsanto knowingly marketed a hazardous product without providing adequate warnings about its risks.
Research has linked glyphosate (the herbicide used in Roundup) to several forms of cancer, fueling widespread concern and numerous legal actions. The company’s failure to disclose known dangers has resulted in a surge of personal injury and wrongful death claims, reflecting the serious injuries sustained by many users.
The litigation is extensive, with a Multidistrict Litigation (MDL) formed in October 2016. Nearly 100,000 product liability suits eventually settled, with Monsanto paying approximately $11 billion.
However, as of February 2025, over 4,400 cases remain active. Bayer (who purchased Monsanto in 2018) has negotiated block settlement agreements with leading plaintiffs’ lawyers, settling many cases before they reach trial.
Recently, Monsanto appealed a $175 million jury verdict in Pennsylvania Superior Court, seeking to overturn the decision in favor of a plaintiff who argued that Roundup caused his cancer.
Dow Corning and Silicone Breast Implants
The Dow Corning breast implant lawsuits represent one of the most significant product liability litigations in medical device history. These lawsuits arose from the concerns surrounding silicone breast implants by Dow Corning, a joint venture of The Dow Chemical Co, which were widely used in cosmetic and reconstructive surgeries from the 1960s through the 1990s.
Plaintiffs claimed that the silicone breast implants were defective and that the company failed to warn of potential risks.
Many plaintiffs alleged that Dow Corning’s silicone breast implants could rupture or leak, allowing the silicone gel to escape and migrate into surrounding tissues. This leakage was linked to a range of serious health problems, including autoimmune disorders, cancer, and connective tissue diseases.
Consumers argued that these risks were not adequately disclosed prior to implantation, leading to severe and lasting health consequences.
In response to mounting legal claims, Dow Corning (full ownership of Dow Corning assumed by Dow Chemical on June 1, 2016) reached a monumental $3.2 billion settlement in 1998 to resolve the majority of the lawsuits regarding the silicone breast implants.
This settlement was instrumental in providing compensation to the affected individuals and set a precedent for future product liability lawsuits involving medical device failures.
Tobacco Companies Product Liability Claims
The Florida Tobacco Litigation involves a number of lawsuits consolidated against major tobacco companies, with many cases asserting that the tobacco industry engaged in deceptive marketing and fraud. Plaintiffs claim that tobacco companies intentionally concealed the risks of using tobacco products, which could lead to lung cancer and other life-threatening diseases.
In 2006, a Florida jury awarded $145 billion and ordered tobacco companies to pay punitive damages, alleging that the companies knew the dangers of smoking but instead downplayed the risks, like the risk of lung cancer and tobacco addiction.
Although the Florida Supreme Court later overturned that award, several multi-million dollar payouts have been made to individuals who developed lung cancer, struggled with mounting medical expenses, and lost insurance coverage as a result of smoking.
In 1998, 52 state and territory attorneys general reached the Master Settlement Agreement (MSA) with the four largest tobacco product companies in the U.S., settling dozens of lawsuits to recover billions of dollars in health care costs from smoking-related illnesses.
General Motors Defective Fuel System
General Motors drivers raised serious concerns over a defective fuel system, claiming that some diesel vehicles are “ticking time bombs” and lead to serious auto accident cases due to faulty fuel injection pumps.
Plaintiffs alleged that General Motors knowingly sold millions of diesel vehicles with a defective design; these vehicles were equipped with fuel pumps that were incompatible with American diesel
As a result of these auto manufacturer liability cases, General Motors eventually settled with a $35 million fuel pump settlement in 2024, resolving claims that the company equipped GMC Sierra and Chevrolet Silverado trucks with engine parts prone to a fuel system defect, prompting a massive recall.
McDonald’s Hot Coffee Case
Stella Liebeck, a 79-year-old woman from Albuquerque, New Mexico, became part of one of the most famous product liability cases when hot McDonald’s coffee, served at around 190°F, spilled on her lap. This caused severe third-degree burns that resulted in eight days of hospitalization and extensive medical treatment including skin grafts.
Despite hundreds of prior complaints and warnings about the dangerously high temperatures served by this fast food giant, McDonald’s coffee didn’t do anything to remedy the situation, and it continued to pose risks.
When the lawsuit emerged, a widespread misinformation campaign was launched to make her look bad by downplaying the true hazards of their hot coffee and shifting blame away from the company.
The injuries Stella Liebeck suffered were far more severe than many initially believed, highlighting the genuine dangers posed by coffee served at such extreme temperatures. Medical experts testified during the trial that liquids at 190°F can cause third-degree burns in just seconds, making it virtually impossible for a customer to prevent serious injury if spilled.
The evidence presented in this case illustrated that Liebeck was not at fault, as she had simply been trying to remove the coffee’s lid while seated in a parked car.
The biggest product liability lawsuits remind us that manufacturers and sellers can be held accountable when their products harm consumers. These legal actions protect people from unsafe items and help drive improvements in industry standards.
The Ripple Effect of Product Liability Litigation
Product liability litigation has a ripple effect that reaches far beyond individual cases. Staying informed about product safety and your legal recourse is essential to protect yourself from dangerous, faulty products that can lead to serious injury, high medical expenses, and long-term health issues such as mesothelioma cancer or ovarian cancer.
There are many other famous product liability cases out there that have eventually been settled or are still being litigated. From lawsuits involving faulty gas tanks and gas cans to cases related to hazardous supply chains, staying informed is essential.
Our experienced legal team is skilled in navigating complex product liability cases and ensuring our clients receive the compensation they deserve for injuries caused by a company’s failure to provide safe products. For any questions or concerns about your potential product liability case, please reach out to Rosenfeld Injury Lawyers to speak with our legal team. Call (888) 424-5757 or complete our online contact form to book a free consultation with a Chicago personal injury lawyer.