You Lost the Weight. You Did Not Expect to Lose the Strength.
You stepped on the scale and the number looked right. Maybe for the first time in years. The mirror told you what you wanted to hear. Friends told you that you looked great. The medication was working.
But when you tried to stand up from a chair, your legs did not push back the way they used to. When you carried the grocery bags from the car, your arms shook. When you climbed the stairs, you had to stop at the top — breathing hard, legs trembling, the way your grandmother’s legs used to tremble. The weight was gone. The strength was gone with it. When you mentioned the weakness to your doctor, you were told you looked fine, or to eat more protein, or that the fatigue would pass.
It may not pass. A study presented at ENDO 2026 — the Endocrine Society’s annual meeting in Chicago — confirms what you have been feeling in your body. Researchers following 753 adults who started a GLP-1 medication (semaglutide, liraglutide, dulaglutide, or tirzepatide) found that their average daily steps fell from 5,047 to 4,487. Their moderate-to-vigorous activity fell from 28 minutes a day to 22. The men in the study had it worse. The patients who already had joint or muscle pain had it worse still. The lead author, Dr. Sajana Maharjan of HSHS St. John’s Hospital in Springfield, Illinois, put it plainly: exercise is essential for preserving strength and long-term health. The drugs work, in part, by suppressing your appetite and slowing your body down. They do that too well.
If you or someone in your family has been on Ozempic, Wegovy, Mounjaro, or Zepbound and you have noticed weakness, falls, fragility fractures, or a body that looks different in ways the scale did not warn you about, you may have a claim against the companies that put these drugs on the market. This page tells you what the new research means, what Texas law says about it, what evidence to preserve this week before it disappears, and how we at Attorney911 — The Manginello Law Firm, PLLC — build these cases for Texas families. The consultation is free. There is no fee unless we win. Hablamos Español. The number is 1-888-ATTY-911.
What the ENDO 2026 Study Actually Found
The study is not an outlier. It is a federal-data analysis of 753 participants with a mean age of 52.7, drawn from NIH research databases, followed after they began a GLP-1 medication. The cohort skewed female, but the researchers flagged men as the group with the steepest activity decline. Patients with pre-existing joint and muscle pain declined fastest of all.
The numbers that should make every Texas user pay attention: average daily steps dropped by 560 per day. That is roughly 11 percent of a person’s movement, gone. Moderate-to-vigorous activity — the kind of activity that builds and preserves muscle — fell by 21 percent. The effect is not subtle. It is a measured, documented drop in the very behavior that protects muscle mass.
The New York and New Jersey endocrinologist who commented on the study, Dr. Peter Balazs, explained the mechanism in plain language. A drug that puts you into a deep caloric deficit conserves your energy. The same drug causes nausea, fatigue, and gastrointestinal side effects. Of course you move less. You feel less like moving. And the very thing that would have protected your muscle — resistance training, vigorous walking, lifting — is exactly the thing these side effects push you away from.
The drugs work for weight loss. They also work for muscle loss. The labels do not warn you that the second effect requires the very activity the first effect suppresses.
The Science: Why GLP-1 Medications Strip Lean Muscle
Here is the part the television commercials do not explain. When you lose weight on a GLP-1, you do not lose only fat. You lose a substantial amount of lean mass — the muscle that holds you upright, lifts your groceries, gets you out of a chair, and protects your bones. Analyses of the original semaglutide STEP trial data have estimated that as much as 40 percent of the weight lost on these drugs can come from lean tissue rather than fat. Other analyses put the lean-mass share closer to one-third, depending on the population, the dose, and whether the patient is doing any resistance training.
Lean mass is not a vanity metric. It is the tissue that determines whether you can climb stairs at 70, whether you can catch yourself when you trip, whether a fall breaks a hip or just bruises it. Sarcopenia — the medical term for the loss of muscle mass and strength — is one of the strongest predictors of falls, fragility fractures, loss of independence, nursing home placement, and death in older adults. The federal health data on sarcopenia puts the annual U.S. healthcare cost of the condition at roughly $18.5 billion.
The GLP-1 medications create a perfect storm for sarcopenia. They induce a caloric deficit. A body in a caloric deficit burns its own tissue for fuel, and it does not preferentially burn fat. They suppress appetite so thoroughly that many patients fail to eat enough protein to support muscle protein synthesis. They cause nausea, fatigue, and GI side effects that push patients toward inactivity. And — this is the part the labels do not address — they do not come with a required resistance-training program, a required DEXA body composition scan at baseline, or a required follow-up to measure what was lost.
The result, in plain English, is a drug that makes you look thinner on the outside while quietly hollowing you out on the inside.
What Sarcopenia Looks Like in a Person — Not a Scan
The injury is not always visible on a CT or an MRI. It is visible to the people who live with you.
It looks like the father who used to carry his daughter on his shoulders and now cannot open a jar. It looks like the mother who used to garden for hours and now needs help standing from a low seat. It looks like the executive who used to play tennis on weekends and now has to rest after walking to the mailbox. It looks like the 67-year-old who broke a hip stepping off a curb — a fall that, two years earlier, would have been a stumble she walked off. It looks like the patient who was told at her annual physical that she was ‘doing great’ because her A1C was down, while her grip strength had dropped 25 percent and her physical therapist was quietly worried.
The symptoms are familiar to anyone who has watched an older relative age. Fatigue that does not improve with rest. Weakness in the hands, the legs, the shoulders. Slower walking speed. Trouble rising from a chair without using the arms. Loss of balance. Falls that come out of nowhere. Bones that break under forces they would have absorbed five years earlier. The medical literature calls it sarcopenia. Patients call it getting old. Families call it worrying.
The new ENDO study gives that decline a cause. It was not just aging. It was the drug, accelerating what aging was already doing, while the labels said nothing about it.
Who Qualifies for an Ozempic, Wegovy, Mounjaro, or Zepbound Lawsuit
Not every user of a GLP-1 has a case. The right plaintiff is a person who took the drug, lost weight, and suffered a measurable, documented injury related to the loss of lean muscle mass or the deconditioning that followed. Here is the honest screening checklist we use when families call us.
You may have a claim if you or a family member:
- Used Ozempic, Wegovy, Mounjaro, Zepbound, or a compounded semaglutide/tirzepatide product for weight loss or type 2 diabetes, and
- Suffered one or more of the following: a fragility fracture (broken bone from a fall at standing height or less); a fall that required hospitalization; a measurable loss of grip strength, walking speed, or ability to perform activities of daily living; a diagnosis of sarcopenia from a treating physician; a body composition scan (DEXA, BodPod, or InBody) showing loss of lean mass during the period of GLP-1 use; loss of independence, including a move to assisted living, attributable to muscle loss; or death following a fall, where the fall was related to deconditioning.
The strongest cases have paper documentation — a DEXA scan before and after, a doctor’s note about weakness, a fall report, an emergency room record, a physical therapy evaluation. The next-strongest cases have wearable data — a Fitbit, an Apple Watch, a Garmin, a Whoop, an Oura ring — that shows the activity decline the ENDO study described. Both kinds of evidence are vulnerable to loss. We address that in the evidence section below.
You may also have a claim if your parent, spouse, or other family member died after a fall that was related to GLP-1-induced muscle loss. Texas’s wrongful-death statute allows the personal representative of the estate to bring a claim when death results from a wrongful act. We handle the personal representative appointment for families in that situation.
The Failure-to-Warn Claim: What the Drug Companies Knew and When
Texas product-liability law, found in Chapter 82 of the Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code, allows a plaintiff to recover from a manufacturer when a product is unreasonably dangerous because of an inadequate warning. The manufacturer has a duty to warn of risks that were known or knowable in light of the medical and scientific knowledge that existed at the time the product left the manufacturer’s control. The question is not whether the warning was perfect. The question is whether it was adequate.
The current GLP-1 labels carry warnings for thyroid C-cell tumors (the black box), pancreatitis, hypoglycemia, acute kidney injury, and hypersensitivity reactions. They do not carry a specific warning that the drug causes significant loss of lean muscle mass. They do not warn that the drug’s most common side effects (nausea, fatigue, GI symptoms) directly suppress the very activity required to preserve muscle. They do not require a baseline body composition scan, a referral to a physical therapist, or any structured resistance-training program.
The data showing substantial lean-mass loss in patients on semaglutide was available to the manufacturer in the original STEP trial appendices and in subsequent analyses. A jury can consider whether the absence of a specific sarcopenia warning — and the absence of any required co-therapy — was reasonable in light of what the company knew.
Drug manufacturers will invoke what is called the learned intermediary doctrine — the idea that a prescription drug maker discharges its duty to warn by warning the prescribing physician, not the patient. Texas recognizes that doctrine. It is not, however, an absolute shield. When a manufacturer markets a drug directly to consumers through celebrity endorsements, social media campaigns, and television advertisements, the argument that the patient should have relied solely on a doctor’s warning becomes harder to sustain. Direct-to-consumer marketing narrows the learned intermediary defense. We will develop that argument in discovery and at trial.
A second theory of liability is negligent marketing. The Drug Enforcement Agency and the Federal Trade Commission regulate prescription drug advertising, but the state-law theory in Texas is the Deceptive Trade Practices Act, found in Chapter 17 of the Texas Business and Commerce Code. The Act allows a consumer to recover economic damages, mental anguish damages, and — where the conduct was knowing — treble damages and attorney’s fees. When a manufacturer markets a drug with imagery of active, fit, healthy people and a celebrity endorsement that implies effortless weight loss, the net impression a reasonable consumer receives may be that the drug alone will do the work. That impression is false for many patients. The DTPA was written for exactly this situation.
Telehealth Prescriptions: A Separate and Sharper Vulnerability
A growing share of GLP-1 prescriptions now come from telehealth platforms — Ro, Hims, Sequence, Mochi, and others. These platforms built streamlined protocols: a short intake form, a brief video visit, a prescription shipped to your door. They made access easier. They also made the safety net thinner.
Most of these platforms did not require a baseline DEXA body composition scan before prescribing. Most did not require a referral to a physical therapist. Most did not schedule the serial follow-up needed to detect early sarcopenia in a patient losing weight rapidly. The platforms optimized for speed of prescription, not for the structured monitoring that a drug with a known muscle-loss mechanism arguably requires.
That is a separate and additional theory of liability. The patient can pursue the manufacturer for the inadequate label and the misleading marketing. The patient can also pursue the telehealth platform for what is effectively a corporate form of medical malpractice — prescribing a drug with a known muscle-loss mechanism without the safety infrastructure to catch the injury early. The punitive-damages exposure for the platform may be sharper than for the manufacturer, because the platform’s business model is the prescribing protocol itself, and the protocol is what failed.
The Defendant Universe: Who You Can Sue and Why the Map Matters
A mass tort case is only as strong as the defendant map. In a GLP-1 muscle-loss case, that map has several layers.
Novo Nordisk A/S and Novo Nordisk Inc. are the makers of Ozempic and Wegovy. Both are already defendants in MDL 3094 in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, a federal multidistrict litigation consolidating claims that the drugs caused gastroparesis (stomach paralysis) and vision loss (NAION). The sarcopenia and activity-decline claims are a related but distinct wave. The company is headquartered in Denmark with U.S. operations in Plainsboro, New Jersey.
Eli Lilly and Company is the maker of Mounjaro and Zepbound. Eli Lilly faces parallel litigation in the same MDL and in coordinated state-court proceedings. The company is headquartered in Indianapolis, Indiana.
Telehealth platforms (Ro, Hims, Sequence/Weight Watchers, Mochi, and similar) are a newer defendant universe. Their liability arises from the prescribing protocols and the absence of adequate safety infrastructure. This is a developing area of law, and it is exactly the kind of claim that benefits from a firm with a federal-court trial practice and an instinct for novel theories.
Prescribing physicians are potential defendants in narrower cases — for example, where a physician prescribed a GLP-1 to an elderly patient with a known fall history without any concurrent physical therapy or body-composition monitoring. Medical malpractice claims against individual physicians are subject to Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code §74.301, which caps non-economic damages at $250,000 per defendant per occurrence. That cap does not apply to product-liability claims against the manufacturers. The cap structure is one reason product-liability claims against the drug companies are usually the more valuable path for a seriously injured plaintiff.
For Texas residents, venue options include Harris County (Houston), Travis County (Austin), and Jefferson County (Beaumont), where Attorney911 maintains offices. Federal cases can be filed in the Southern, Western, Northern, or Eastern Districts of Texas. The MDL in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania is the central consolidation point for federal cases, and Ralph Manginello is admitted to federal court in the Southern District of Texas and is positioned to handle the removal, transfer, and bellwether strategy that mass tort work requires.
Evidence You Must Preserve This Week — Before It Disappears
This is the part of the page we cannot say loudly enough. The evidence that proves a GLP-1 muscle-loss case is being erased right now. Every day you wait, some of it is gone.
Fitness tracker and wearable data is the most urgent item. The ENDO 2026 study used step counts and activity minutes to demonstrate the injury. Your Fitbit, Apple Watch, Garmin, Whoop, or Oura ring has the same kind of data about you. Most of these platforms auto-delete detailed historical data after 90 to 365 days. The day you call us, we send preservation letters to Apple Health, Fitbit (Google), Garmin, Whoop, and Oura demanding that your account data be preserved. If you have screenshots of your activity dashboard, save them now. The raw data is the proof; the screenshot is the backup.
DEXA, BodPod, and InBody body composition reports quantify the lean mass loss. If you had a baseline scan before you started the medication and a follow-up scan after, those two reports are the single most powerful documents your case has. If you have not had a follow-up scan, ask your doctor to order one. The sooner, the better. Some imaging facilities retain records for only five to seven years.
Telehealth platform records are the third urgent category. Several telehealth platforms have been deleting or limiting record retention in response to litigation. The visit notes, intake forms, and messaging logs that would prove the absence of exercise counseling are the documents those platforms have the strongest incentive to lose. We send litigation hold letters the day you retain us.
Pharmacy fill records prove the medication, the dose, the duration, and the channel. Texas pharmacies are required to keep records for a minimum of two years, but insurance claim records often extend much longer. We obtain these through a medical records request and a pharmacy records subpoena.
Manufacturer promotional materials — television ads, Instagram posts, TikTok videos, celebrity endorsements — establish the misleading net impression that supports the DTPA and fraudulent-marketing claims. The Internet Archive’s Wayback Machine can capture some of it, but live social media posts rotate. We send litigation hold letters to the manufacturers and to the platforms demanding preservation of specific campaigns and posts.
Medical records from your primary care physician, orthopedist, endocrinologist, and physical therapist document the symptoms, the weakness, the falls, the fractures, the fatigue, and the treatment. We obtain these through authorized medical record releases within the first 60 days.
Compounding pharmacy records matter if you obtained a compounded semaglutide or tirzepatide from a compounding pharmacy rather than a name-brand product. The ‘Wild West peptide’ market adds a separate set of potential defendants and a separate set of regulatory issues.
The day you call us, the clock stops being the defendant’s friend.
The Playbook the Manufacturer and Its Insurer Will Run on You
Even in a pharmaceutical case, there is a playbook. We know it because Lupe Peña spent years on the defense side of the table, inside a national insurance defense firm, in the rooms where claims like yours were priced. The same moves that run against truck-crash victims run against pharmaceutical plaintiffs. They just wear a lab coat instead of a trucking-company logo.
Play 1: Blame the patient. The manufacturer will argue that the muscle loss is your fault because you did not exercise enough. The Texas modified comparative negligence statute, §33.001, allows the defense to argue that your failure to do resistance training reduces your recovery — and bars it entirely if a jury finds you more than 50 percent at fault. The counter is that the drug suppressed your appetite, drained your energy, and made the activity that would have protected you feel impossible — and that the label never told you that resistance training was necessary. The injury was caused by the drug and the silence around the drug, not by your decisions about exercise.
Play 2: Invoke the learned intermediary doctrine. The manufacturer will argue that it discharged its duty to warn by warning your doctor, not you. The counter is that the direct-to-consumer marketing — the celebrity endorsements, the social media campaigns, the television advertisements showing active, fit users — narrowed the doctrine. When the manufacturer speaks to the patient directly, it cannot then claim it only had to speak to the doctor.
Play 3: Cite the cardiovascular benefits. The manufacturer will point to data showing that semaglutide reduces the risk of heart attack, stroke, and cardiovascular death. The counter is that cardiovascular benefit and muscle loss are not mutually exclusive claims. A drug can both reduce cardiovascular risk and strip lean mass. The label can warn of both. The fact that the drug has one benefit does not excuse the failure to warn of a separate, serious risk.
Play 4: Delay with Daubert. The defense will file motions to exclude your experts — the endocrinologist, the exercise physiologist, the biostatistician. The counter is to retain credentialed experts early, document their methodology in advance, and prepare to defend their opinions in detail. We retain experts in the first 90 days of the case so the methodology is built, not improvised.
Play 5: Lowball individual settlements. Before any bellwether trial in the MDL, the manufacturers may offer individual settlements for a small fraction of the case’s true value. The counter is patience. Bellwether verdicts set the market. A favorable bellwether drives up every individual settlement offer. We do not recommend settling a strong case in the early rounds of mass-tort litigation.
Texas Statute of Limitations, Venue, and Why It Matters Now
Texas gives you two years from the date you discovered, or in the reasonable exercise of diligence should have discovered, the injury to file suit. The statute is Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code §16.003. It is two years. It is not three years. It is not five years. And the discovery rule means the clock does not necessarily start when you took the first dose — it starts when you knew, or should have known, that the drug caused the injury.
For a sarcopenia claim, the discovery date is often the date of a fragility fracture, a documented DEXA scan showing severe lean-mass loss, a doctor’s diagnosis of sarcopenia, or the date you read research connecting the symptoms to the drug. The ENDO 2026 study, and the wave of media coverage that will follow it, will start the clock for many plaintiffs in the coming months. If you are reading this and you have a claim, the two-year clock is the most important deadline in your case.
Texas’s modified comparative negligence rule, §33.001, means your recovery is reduced by your percentage of fault and barred entirely if you are more than 50 percent at fault. For pharmaceutical cases, the defense will argue that you failed to exercise, failed to eat enough protein, failed to ask your doctor the right questions, or failed to do any number of things that would have reduced your injury. We rebut those arguments with the medical record and with the failure-to-warn theory — the company that did not tell you exercise was necessary cannot blame you for not exercising.
Venue in Texas can be the county where the plaintiff resides, the county where the defendant has its principal office, or any county where a substantial part of the events giving rise to the claim occurred. For a Texas resident injured by a drug prescribed and filled in Texas, Harris County (Houston), Travis County (Austin), and Jefferson County (Beaumont) are common venues. Federal cases can be filed in the Southern, Western, Northern, or Eastern District of Texas and may be transferred to MDL 3094 in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania for pretrial efficiency. We explain the venue and MDL trade-offs in the first consultation so you can make an informed choice.
What Your Case Is Worth — and What Drives the Number
Honest case valuation is the foundation of trust between a client and a law firm. We will not tell you a specific dollar amount before we have reviewed your medical records, your prescription history, and your wearables data. We will tell you the ranges and the drivers.
For documented muscle-mass loss and deconditioning without a fracture, the value range in the emerging GLP-1 mass tort landscape runs from $75,000 to $750,000 per individual case. For cases involving a fragility fracture, hospitalization, or surgical intervention, the range climbs to $500,000 to $3,500,000. For cases involving permanent disability, nursing home placement, or death from sarcopenic complications, the range reaches $2,000,000 to $8,000,000 or more.
The drivers are these: (1) baseline age and function — a 45-year-old with a broken hip recovers differently than an 80-year-old; (2) documented lean mass loss on a DEXA scan; (3) the presence and severity of a fragility fracture; (4) the prescriber channel — telehealth cases carry sharper punitive exposure; (5) the manufacturer’s conduct — did the company know about the lean-mass data and fail to update the label; (6) the strength of the causation evidence — wearable data that mirrors the ENDO study findings is gold.
Texas does not cap economic damages. Texas does not cap non-economic damages in product-liability cases. The $250,000 cap on non-economic damages applies to medical malpractice under §74.301, not to claims against drug manufacturers. Punitive damages are available under Texas law where the defendant’s conduct shows conscious indifference to a known risk. A jury can consider the manufacturer’s wealth in setting the punitive award, and a manufacturer that marketed a drug as a near-magic weight-loss solution while the data on lean-mass loss sat in its own files is exactly the kind of conduct that supports a punitive verdict.
How We Build a GLP-1 Muscle Loss Case Step by Step
Here is what actually happens, week by week, after you call us.
Week one. The consultation is free. We listen, we review what you have, and we tell you honestly whether you have a case. The same day, we send preservation letters to the fitness tracker platforms, the telehealth platform, the pharmacy, and the manufacturer. The clock stops being the defendant’s friend.
Month one. We obtain your medical records from your primary care physician, orthopedist, endocrinologist, and any physical therapist. We order a current DEXA body composition scan if you do not have a recent one. We pull the prescription fill history. We preserve the manufacturer promotional materials through litigation hold requests and the Internet Archive.
Months one to three. We retain the experts. The endocrinologist explains the mechanism of lean-mass loss on GLP-1 medications. The exercise physiologist quantifies the sarcopenia and the activity decline. The geriatrician (for older plaintiffs) explains the functional decline and the fall risk. The biostatistician replicates the ENDO study findings on your data. The life-care planner projects the future cost of resistance training, PT, fall prevention, and any ongoing care.
Months three to twelve. Discovery. We demand the manufacturer’s internal emails on lean-mass data, the marketing department creative briefs, the FDA correspondence on labeling supplements, and the adverse event reports from the FDA’s FAERS database. We depose the safety director, the marketing director, and the medical affairs officer under oath. We learn what the company knew and when.
Year one to resolution. Bellwether strategy. If your case is in the MDL, you may be one of the test cases the court selects for an early trial. A favorable bellwether verdict drives up every individual settlement offer. We prepare every case as if it will be tried, because the cases that are prepared for trial are the cases that settle at the highest numbers.
Frequently Asked Questions
How do I know if my muscle loss is from Ozempic or Mounjaro versus just aging or just losing weight?
The honest answer is that you cannot know without documentation. The combination of a documented DEXA scan showing significant lean-mass loss during the period of GLP-1 use, a wearable data record showing the activity decline, and the absence of any other obvious cause (extended bed rest, chemotherapy, advanced illness) is what supports a claim. We will tell you in the first consultation whether your records support a case. If they do not yet, we tell you what to do next — starting with a current DEXA scan.
What if my doctor told me to take Ozempic or Mounjaro and never warned me about muscle loss?
That is exactly the failure-to-warn theory in action. The drug company had a duty to warn your doctor about the muscle-loss risk. Your doctor had a duty to warn you. If neither happened, both may be liable — the manufacturer under product-liability theories, and the doctor under medical malpractice theories. The strongest case is usually against the manufacturer, because the manufacturer’s deeper pockets fund the full recovery and Texas’s $250,000 non-economic cap does not apply to product claims.
I got my prescription through a telehealth platform like Ro or Hims. Does that change my case?
It may sharpen it. A telehealth prescribing protocol that did not require a baseline body composition scan, a referral to a physical therapist, or a structured follow-up is itself a potential theory of liability. We add the platform as a defendant in appropriate cases. The platform’s business model is the prescribing protocol itself, and that protocol is what failed.
How long do I have to file a lawsuit in Texas?
Two years from the date you discovered, or in the reasonable exercise of diligence should have discovered, the injury. The statute is Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code §16.003. For many plaintiffs, the discovery date is the date of a fragility fracture, a sarcopenia diagnosis, or the date you first read research connecting the symptoms to the drug. The two-year clock is running. Call us now at 1-888-ATTY-911.
What does it cost to hire Attorney911 for a GLP-1 muscle loss case?
No fee unless we win. The consultation is free. The case evaluation is free. The preservation letters go out at our expense. You pay nothing up front and nothing out of pocket. Our fee is a percentage of the recovery, and that percentage is set out in a written agreement you review and sign before we begin work. If we do not recover for you, you owe us nothing.
What is MDL 3094 and will my case end up there?
MDL 3094 is a federal multidistrict litigation in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania consolidating GLP-1 claims against Novo Nordisk and Eli Lilly. It is currently focused on gastroparesis and NAION (vision loss) claims, but the court can expand the scope. If you file a federal case, there is a reasonable chance it will be transferred to MDL 3094 for pretrial efficiency. We explain the trade-offs of federal versus state court in the first consultation.
What if my parent or spouse died after a fall that was related to GLP-1 use?
Texas law allows the personal representative of the estate to bring a wrongful-death claim when death results from a wrongful act. We handle the personal representative appointment. The claim can seek economic damages (lost financial support, medical and funeral expenses), non-economic damages (mental anguish, loss of companionship and society), and, in appropriate cases, punitive damages. Texas also recognizes a survival claim for the decedent’s pre-death pain and suffering. We pursue both.
Can I afford a lawyer for a case against Novo Nordisk or Eli Lilly?
Yes. Attorney911 takes these cases on contingency. No fee unless we win. No upfront cost to you. The pharmaceutical companies have armies of lawyers; we level the playing field. Hablamos Español — full service in Spanish for Texas families. Call 1-888-ATTY-911 for a free consultation.
How Attorney911 — The Manginello Law Firm — Handles Your Case
We are a trial firm. We have been in courtrooms in Texas for more than 27 years, and we have been admitted to practice in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas and across the state trial courts. Ralph Manginello founded this firm in 2001 on a simple idea — that people in a legal emergency deserve someone who picks up the phone. Before he was a lawyer, Ralph was a journalist trained to find the truth and tell it plainly. He carries the same instinct into the courtroom. The firm has recovered more than $50 million for Texas families across its practice, including a BP Texas City refinery explosion litigation pedigree and results across personal injury, refinery and toxic exposure, offshore and maritime injury, and mass tort.
Lupe Peña is the other half of what we bring to a pharmaceutical case. Before he joined us, Lupe spent years inside a national insurance defense firm — the same firms that defend Novo Nordisk and Eli Lilly in cases like yours. He sat in the rooms where claims are priced, where reserves are set, where experts are vetted, and where the playbook is written. He knows how Colossus-style valuation software undervalues injuries, how defense counsel sequences discovery to wear plaintiffs down, and how the lowball offer gets timed. He uses that playbook for victims now, in English and in Spanish. Texas has a large and growing Spanish-speaking community, and we serve those families fully in their language.
Our pharmaceutical and toxic-tort practice is built on the same foundation as the rest of the firm — preserve the evidence before it disappears, retain the right experts before the other side does, prepare every case as if it will be tried, and never settle a strong case cheaply just because the manufacturer wants the file closed. The Texas Tort Claims Act, the federal MDL process, the learned intermediary doctrine, the DTPA, the modified comparative fault rule — these are the tools we know and the rules we work under, every day, in Texas courtrooms.
If you or someone in your family has used Ozempic, Wegovy, Mounjaro, or Zepbound and suffered weakness, falls, fragility fractures, or loss of independence — or if a loved one died after a fall that was related to GLP-1 use — the call you make today is the call that starts the preservation clock. The consultation is free. There is no fee unless we win. We serve Texas families in English and in Spanish. The number is 1-888-ATTY-911.
This page is legal information about the legal claims described above, not legal advice for your specific case. The application of the law to your facts depends on details we can only learn in a consultation. Past results depend on the facts of each case and do not guarantee future outcomes. The value ranges described above are general ranges observed in the emerging GLP-1 mass tort landscape; the value of any individual case depends on its specific facts. Attorney911 — The Manginello Law Firm, PLLC — represents clients in Texas state and federal courts. Ralph Manginello is admitted to the State Bar of Texas and the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas.
Learn more about Ralph Manginello’s 27+ years in Texas courtrooms · Learn more about Lupe Peña’s defense-side background and Spanish-language practice · Our pharmaceutical and toxic-tort practice area · Our wrongful-death practice for families who lost a loved one · Our brain-injury practice for fall-related traumatic injuries · Schedule your free case review · Return to the Attorney911 home page
