Skip Navigation

Eligible for a Depo-Provera lawsuit?

Lawsuit Blames Depo Shot for Brain Tumors, Intense Headaches

Lawsuit Blames Depo Shot for Brain Tumors, Intense Headaches

A Minnesota woman has filed a lawsuit saying she suffered intense headaches, vision problems and required surgery to remove an intracranial meningioma allegedly caused by the use of Depo-Provera.

The complaint (PDF) was brought by Lennie M. Theis and her husband, Clarence, in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida on April 21. It names Pfizer, Inc., Pharmacia & Upjohn Co LLC, and Pharmacia LLC as defendants.

Theis claims that Depo-Provera birth control injections caused her to develop an intracranial meningioma after using the shots in the early 1990s. This diagnosis led to severe headaches, vision loss and neurological problems that ultimately required brain surgery, leaving her with permanent injuries and a need for lifelong monitoring

Depo-Provera Brain Tumor Risks

Depo-Provera (depot medroxyprogesterone acetate, or DMPA) is a long-acting birth control injection given to women four times a year. Originally introduced in the U.S. in 1992, these “Depo shots” have been given to tens of millions of women worldwide.

In 2024, studies began to emerge linking Depo-Provera side effects to meningioma risks. The research warned women that receiving the Depo shot made them five times as likely to develop brain tumors compared to women who either did not take birth control or used something else. These kinds of tumors can cause serious, potentially life-threatening complications, often requiring brain surgery and life-long medical monitoring.

In light of these findings, Pfizer and generic manufacturers of the injections face nearly 3,500 Depo-Provera meningioma lawsuits very similar to the one filed by Theis. Each alleges that the manufacturers knew, or should have known, about the risks of intracranial meningioma development, yet failed to warn women or the medical community.

Depo-Provera-Lawsuit-Settlement
Depo-Provera-Lawsuit-Settlement

Depo Shot Meningioma Allegations

According to the complaint, Theis received Depo-Provera injections for about one year, beginning in 1993.

She later developed severe headaches, neurological symptoms and vision loss, which ultimately led to an MRI confirming the presence of an intracranial meningioma.

The lawsuit states that Theis suffered significant harm from both the tumor and the surgery required to remove it, and will likely require ongoing medical monitoring for the rest of her life.

It further alleges that Pfizer knew or should have known, even before bringing Depo-Provera to market, that the drug’s hormonal components could promote the growth of brain tumors.

“Since at least 1983, the medical and scientific communities have been aware of the high number of progesterone receptors on meningioma cells, especially relative to estrogen receptors.”

Lennie Theis et al. v. Pfizer Inc. et al

Additional studies published in 1989, 2015 and in subsequent years have reported similar findings, raising concerns about a potential link between DMPA and meningioma development. However, Theis alleges Pfizer has not updated the drug’s warning label to reflect these risks. 

Her lawsuit alleges the manufacturer has chosen profits over women’s health. It presents claims of failure to warn, design defect, negligence, negligent failure to warn, negligent design defect, negligent misrepresentation, fraudulent misrepresentation, breach of warranty, and loss of consortium. Theis seeks both compensatory and punitive damages.

Depo-Provera Intracranial Meningioma Lawsuits

The complaint will be consolidated with similar federal claims in the Northern District of Florida as part of a Depo-Provera intracranial meningioma lawsuit multidistrict litigation (MDL). The litigation has been centralized before U.S. District Judge M. Casey Rodgers for coordinated discovery and pretrial proceedings.

Early in the litigation, Judge Rodgers selected five “pilot” cases to serve as early test trials, which will give the parties the opportunity to see how juries respond to evidence and testimony likely to be a factor throughout the litigation.

Before those cases, however, the parties will focus on general causation issues, which determine whether plaintiffs can present reliable scientific evidence linking Depo-Provera to brain tumor development. These general causation hearings will be held from June 24 through June 26, 2026.

If plaintiffs show the judge their science and evidence is reliable, the parties will continue to prepare the pilot cases for early bellwether test trials, which, while not binding on other cases, could have a significant impact on potential Depo-Provera settlement negotiations.

The first bellwether trials are currently scheduled to begin in December 2026.

To stay up to date on this litigation, sign up to receive Depo-Provera lawsuit updates sent directly to your inbox.

Irvin Jackson
Written By: Irvin Jackson

Senior Legal Journalist & Contributing Editor

Irvin Jackson is a senior investigative reporter at AboutLawsuits.com with more than 30 years of experience covering mass tort litigation, environmental policy, and consumer safety. He previously served as Associate Editor at Inside the EPA and contributes original reporting on product liability lawsuits, regulatory failures, and nationwide litigation trends.



0 Comments


This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

Share Your Comments

This field is hidden when viewing the form
I authorize the above comments be posted on this page
Post Comment
Weekly Digest Opt-In

Want your comments reviewed by a lawyer?

To have an attorney review your comments and contact you about a potential case, provide your contact information below. This will not be published.

NOTE: Providing information for review by an attorney does not form an attorney-client relationship.

MORE TOP STORIES

Two years after allowing thousands of incomplete Suboxone tooth decay lawsuits to be submitted due to statutes of limitation laws, a federal judge says those cases should be filed individually or dismissed.
As the number of lawsuits over tabletop fire pits continues to grow, the CPSC has issued a warning indicating that despite a consumer’s death linked to one product, the manufacturer has not agreed to remove the devices from the market.