top of page

Class Action Lawsuits, Big Pharma, and Pfizer's Criminal History

Writer's picture: Luke GirkeLuke Girke

Class action lawsuits have become a prominent means for individuals to seek justice and compensation when they believe large corporations have wronged them. In recent years, the pharmaceutical industry has faced its fair share of class action lawsuits, with one of the most notable players being Pfizer. This article will explore the history of Pfizer's involvement in class action lawsuits, shedding light on some controversies plaguing this pharmaceutical giant.

Pfizer: A Pharmaceutical Powerhouse

Pfizer, founded in 1849, has grown to become one of the world's largest pharmaceutical companies. With a diverse portfolio of drugs and a global reach, the company has enjoyed tremendous success over the years. However, its journey has not been without its fair share of legal troubles, which have led to class action lawsuits on multiple occasions.

The Neurontin Case

One of Pfizer's most significant class action lawsuits occurred in the early 2000s when the company faced allegations of marketing the epilepsy drug Neurontin for off-label uses. Neurontin, which was approved for treating epilepsy, was being promoted for various other conditions, including bipolar disorder and migraines. Pfizer eventually settled this lawsuit for $430 million in 2004.

This case raised concerns about the pharmaceutical industry's practices, as it highlighted the aggressive marketing tactics employed by some companies to expand the use of their drugs beyond their approved indications.

In 2009, Pfizer faced another class action lawsuit about its pain relievers Celebrex and Bextra. The lawsuit alleged that these drugs caused cardiovascular and gastrointestinal problems and that Pfizer failed to disclose these risks adequately. Pfizer agreed to pay $894 million to settle the lawsuit, including a criminal fine of $1.195 billion for off-label marketing and kickback allegations.

This case highlighted the importance of transparency and ethical marketing practices in the pharmaceutical industry and the potential risks associated with certain medications.

The Zoloft Birth Defects Lawsuits

Pfizer faced class action lawsuits related to its antidepressant drug Zoloft. The plaintiffs claimed that Zoloft was responsible for causing congenital disabilities when taken during pregnancy. While Pfizer maintained that Zoloft was safe, it agreed to a $15 million settlement in 2016 to resolve these lawsuits.

These cases underscored the need for thorough research and transparent communication about medications' potential risks, mainly when prescribed to vulnerable populations like pregnant women.

The Lipitor Diabetes Lawsuits

In recent years, Pfizer has also been embroiled in class action lawsuits related to its popular cholesterol-lowering drug, Lipitor. Plaintiffs alleged that Lipitor increased the risk of developing diabetes and that Pfizer did not adequately warn patients of this risk. Pfizer has reached settlements in some of these cases, highlighting the importance of informed consent and risk communication in the pharmaceutical industry.

Class action lawsuits have played a significant role in holding Pfizer and other pharmaceutical giants accountable for their actions. While Pfizer has made groundbreaking contributions to medicine, it has also faced numerous legal challenges related to its marketing practices and the safety of its drugs. These cases serve as a reminder that transparency, ethical behaviour, and patient safety must remain at the forefront of the pharmaceutical industry's priorities.

As consumers become increasingly aware of their rights and the potential risks associated with pharmaceutical products, class action lawsuits will likely continue to be vital for ensuring accountability and protecting the interests of patients and the public. Pharmaceutical companies must adhere to ethical standards and regulatory guidelines to avoid becoming entangled in costly legal battles that erode public trust and their bottom line.


© 2025 The Girke Group Melbourne. 

Website Designed by Luke Girke in collaboration with The Girke Group Management.



Website

The information provided by The Girke Group (‘we’, ‘us’, or ‘our’) on http://www.girke.com.au (the ‘Site’) and our mobile application is for general informational purposes only. All information on the Site and our mobile application is provided in good faith, however we make no representation or warranty of any kind, express or implied, regarding the accuracy, adequacy, validity, reliability, availability, or completeness of any information on the Site our or mobile application. UNDER NO CIRCUMSTANCE SHALL WE HAVE ANY LIABILITY TO YOU FOR ANY LOSS OR DAMAGE OF ANY KIND INCURRED AS A RESULT OF THE USE OF THE SITE OR OUR MOBILE APPLICATION OR RELIANCE ON ANY INFORMATION PROVIDED ON THE SITE AND OUR APPLICATION. YOUR USE OF THE SITE AND OUR MOBILE APPLICATION AND YOUR RELIANCE ON ANY INFORMATION ON THE SITE AND OUR MOBILE APPLICATION IS SOLELY AT YOUR OWN RISK. 

 

Professional Liability

The Site cannot and does not contain medical/health, legal, and fitness advice. The medical/health, legal, and fitness information is provided for general informational and educational purposes only and is not a substitute for professional advice. Accordingly, before taking any actions based upon such information, we encourage you to consult with the appropriate professionals. We not provide any kind of medical/health, legal, and fitness advice. THE USE OR RELIANCE OF ANY INFORMATION CONTAINED ON THE SITE OR OUR MOBILE APPLICATION IS SOLELY AT YOUR OWN RISK. 

 

Testimonials  

The Site may contain testimonials by users of our products and/or services. These testimonials reflect the real-life experiences and opinions of such users. However, the experiences are personal to those particular users, and may not necessarily be representative of all users of our products and/or services. We do not claim, and you should not assume, that all users will have the same experiences. YOUR INDIVIDUAL RESULTS MAY VARY.  The testimonials on the Site are submitted in various forms such as text, audio, and/or video, and are reviewed by us before being posted. They appear on the Site verbatim as given by the users, except for the correction of grammar or typing errors. Some testimonials may have been shortened for the sake of brevity where the full testimonial contained extraneous information not relevant to the general public. The views and opinions contained in the testimonials belong solely to the individual user and do not reflect our views and opinions. We are not affiliated with users who provide testimonials, and users are not paid or otherwise compensated for their testimonials.

Blog

Articles on this website are not intended to diagnose, treat, cure, or prevent any diseases. The Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA) and Food and Drug Administration (FDA) have not evaluated these articles. All information available on the website and blog is for educational purposes only. A qualified healthcare professional should be consulted before implementing any fitness, health, or nutritional protocol provided in the blog. Additionally, the articles containing material related to the law, legalities, or the legal profession are exploratory only and are not legal advice.
 

bottom of page