Pharmaceutical companies are required to test their products thoroughly, disclose known risks to patients and prescribers, and comply with FDA regulations. When they cut corners — rushing drugs to market, burying side effect data, or failing to update warning labels — people get hurt. Bur Oak Injury Law represents people harmed by defective prescription drugs, over-the-counter medications, and pharmaceutical devices across central Missouri. Attorney Chris Miller personally handles every case — no handoffs to associates.
FDA approval does not guarantee that a drug is safe for every person who takes it. Many drugs now involved in litigation passed regulatory review before long-term use revealed hidden risks — cancer, blood clots, organ damage, and permanent disability that manufacturers knew or should have known about. If you or a family member was seriously harmed by a drug, a free case evaluation is the right first step.
Pharmaceutical manufacturers are among the most well-resourced defendants in American litigation. When a drug causes widespread harm, their legal teams begin building a defense before patients even connect their diagnosis to the medication. They retain scientists, fund counter-studies, and deploy legal strategies designed to delay and deny compensation. You need an attorney who understands how those defenses work — and how to counter them. In cases where a drug caused a death, Missouri's wrongful death statute gives surviving family members additional rights.
Dangerous drug cases turn on three core theories: design defect (the drug itself was unreasonably dangerous), manufacturing defect (a contamination or production error made your specific batch harmful), and failure to warn (the manufacturer knew about risks and failed to disclose them to patients or prescribers). Chris analyzes every case for all three — because the strongest claims often combine multiple theories. When a prescribing physician's conduct is also at issue, there may be a concurrent medical malpractice claim against the provider.
Some dangerous drug cases proceed as individual product liability claims. Others are coordinated as multi-district litigation (MDL) — a federal mechanism that consolidates thousands of similar cases before a single judge for pretrial proceedings while preserving each plaintiff's individual rights. Bur Oak Injury Law handles both paths and can advise whether joining existing MDL or pursuing a standalone claim gives you the best position.
Drug harm does not always appear immediately. Many medications at the center of current litigation — heartburn drugs, diabetes injections, arthritis treatments — were prescribed for years before the connection between the drug and serious conditions like cancer, kidney disease, or cardiovascular events became clear. In Missouri, the discovery rule may extend the filing deadline for latent harms, but early consultation remains essential to preserve evidence and identify the right litigation strategy. In fatal cases, see our page on wrongful death claims for information on the separate three-year filing window.
The FDA maintains a searchable database of drug recalls, market withdrawals, and safety alerts. If a drug you were prescribed appears on that list — or if your doctor has connected your diagnosis to a medication — contact Bur Oak Injury Law for a free evaluation.
Sources: FDA Drug Recalls & Safety Alerts · Journal of the American Society of Nephrology (JASN) · §516.120 RSMo
The following medications and devices have been the subject of significant litigation or active MDL proceedings. This list is not exhaustive — if you experienced serious harm after taking any prescription or over-the-counter drug, a case evaluation is the right first step regardless of whether the drug appears here.
GLP-1 receptor agonists marketed for diabetes and weight loss have been linked to severe gastroparesis (stomach paralysis) and gallbladder complications requiring surgery. Litigation is active and growing.
This JAK inhibitor prescribed for rheumatoid arthritis carries documented cardiovascular risks — heart attack, stroke, blood clots, and cancer — that the FDA determined were not adequately disclosed in original labeling.
A drug prescribed for interstitial cystitis that has been linked to a distinct pattern of severe eye damage — pigmentary maculopathy — that can cause permanent vision loss even after the drug is discontinued.
A chemotherapy agent whose manufacturer allegedly concealed that permanent alopecia — irreversible hair loss — was a known risk while marketing the drug as equivalent to alternatives that did not carry the same permanent side effect.
Long-term use of proton pump inhibitors has been associated with a 50%+ increased risk of chronic kidney disease and acute kidney injury in peer-reviewed research. Millions of Americans took these drugs for years without adequate warning.
Testosterone replacement products marketed for "low T" have been linked to cardiovascular events including heart attack and stroke, particularly in older men with pre-existing risk factors that manufacturers downplayed.
Pharmaceutical manufacturers and distributors aggressively promoted opioids while downplaying addiction risk. Cases may include claims for addiction, overdose injuries, and — in fatal cases — wrongful death under Missouri's wrongful death statute.
Philips recalled millions of CPAP and BiPAP devices after determining that degrading sound-abatement foam released carcinogenic particles and toxic gases directly into users' airways during sleep.
Dangerous drug cases can be brought under several overlapping theories. Chris evaluates every case for all applicable claims — because the strongest dangerous drug cases often combine multiple legal theories against multiple defendants. When a device or drug caused catastrophic injury — spinal damage, organ failure, or permanent disability — the stakes demand a thorough multi-theory approach.
The drug's formulation itself was unreasonably dangerous — a safer alternative design was feasible and the risks outweighed the benefits as designed.
The manufacturer knew or should have known about serious risks and failed to adequately disclose them in labeling, package inserts, or direct communications to prescribers. This is the most common theory in pharmaceutical litigation.
A contamination, production error, or quality control failure made a specific batch or lot of the drug dangerous in a way that deviated from its intended design.
A pharmacist dispensed the wrong drug, the wrong dosage, or failed to flag a dangerous drug interaction — giving rise to separate liability distinct from the manufacturer's conduct.
Manufacturers promoted drugs for off-label uses not supported by clinical evidence, or ran direct-to-consumer campaigns that minimized risk disclosures in ways that misled patients.
When a dangerous drug causes death, Missouri's wrongful death statute (§537.080 RSMo) allows surviving family members to pursue compensation for their losses.
Missouri's product liability framework allows injured patients to pursue the full range of compensatory damages — economic and non-economic — against drug manufacturers, distributors, and other responsible parties. Missouri's comparative fault rule under §537.765 RSMo means that a drug company's attempt to shift partial blame to the plaintiff reduces — but does not eliminate — your right to recovery. When a workplace-prescribed medication caused harm, there may also be a parallel occupational illness workers' comp claim.
Past and future medical expenses directly caused by the drug's effects — including diagnostic costs, additional surgeries, hospitalization, and ongoing treatment. Lost wages during recovery and reduced earning capacity if the injury caused permanent impairment. Out-of-pocket costs for medical equipment, rehabilitation, and in-home care.
Pain and suffering from the injury and its treatment. Emotional distress, anxiety, and depression related to a serious or permanent diagnosis. Loss of enjoyment of life where the drug's side effects permanently changed daily function, mobility, or independence.
Under §537.080 RSMo, surviving family members can recover funeral and burial costs, loss of financial support, loss of consortium, and the decedent's pain and suffering prior to death.
Where a manufacturer acted with conscious disregard for patient safety — concealing known risks, suppressing internal studies, or continuing to sell a drug after becoming aware of life-threatening side effects — Missouri courts may award punitive damages. These are intended to punish the defendant and deter future misconduct.
Chris Miller personally handles every step — from the first call through resolution. No handoffs to associates or paralegals.
Product liability claims in Missouri — including dangerous drug cases — are generally subject to a five-year statute of limitations under §516.120 RSMo. This is the general personal injury and products liability window. Wrongful death claims carry a shorter three-year window under §537.100 RSMo. Missing either deadline permanently extinguishes your right to compensation.
Missouri also recognizes the discovery rule for latent harms — situations where a patient could not reasonably have known that a drug caused their injury. In those cases, the five-year clock may run from the date you discovered (or reasonably should have discovered) the connection, rather than the date you first took the drug. Because the application of the discovery rule depends on individual facts, consulting an attorney promptly is essential — do not assume you have more time than you do.
Drug manufacturers and their insurers do not wait for patients to understand their rights before acting. They preserve favorable evidence, retain experts, and work to minimize liability from the moment adverse events are reported. Bur Oak Injury Law moves with the same urgency on behalf of injured patients. Request a free consultation — there is no fee unless we recover compensation for you.
No fee unless we win. One attorney handles your case from the first call through resolution.