Zantac Lawsuit: The Court's Rulings and Final Judgments in MDL No. 2924
The federal Zantac lawsuits were gathered in one multidistrict litigation, MDL No. 2924, before Judge Robin L. Rosenberg in the Southern District of Florida. The court's orders quoted below address the defendants' general causation motions for the five cancers it calls Designated Cancers, summary judgment in those cases, and the rules for every other case. The Panel's report of October 1, 2026 lists 847 actions still pending, of 15,018 in total. This page quotes the orders, and the checker below reads them for your situation.
It states no settlement or award: no document read for this page describes one.
Check your situation against the court's orders
Pick the cancer and where your case stands to see what the court's orders say about it, in their own words. Then add up the costs you can document, to bring one figure to a lawyer.
Choose the cancer and where your case stands to see what the court's orders say about it.
Add up your documented costs
Enter what you can show with bills, pay records or receipts. The total is only the sum of what you enter.
Dollars, with or without commas or a dollar sign. Leave a field blank if it does not apply.
This is not an estimate of a claim or a settlement. It adds no pain and suffering, takes out no fees or liens, and says nothing about what any claim could be worth. It is the total of your own figures, to bring to a lawyer.
What the Zantac lawsuit claims
The court's page describes the litigation: “This matter concerns the heartburn medication Zantac.” (U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida, MDL No. 2924 website (read Oct. 6, 2026)) “The Judicial Panel for Multidistrict Litigation formed this MDL (number 2924) on February 6, 2020.” (U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida, MDL No. 2924 website (read Oct. 6, 2026))
The cases claim that ranitidine products led to cancer. The court's rulings center on five cancers it defines: “Designated Cancers are bladder, esophageal, pancreatic, stomach, and liver cancer.” (Tentative Ruling Entering Rule 58 Final Judgment, In re Zantac (Ranitidine) Products Liability Litigation, MDL No. 2924, No. 9:20-md-2924-RLR, ECF No. 6787, at 1 (S.D. Fla. July 21, 2023) n.1)
These are claims and allegations. The court's rulings, quoted below, are about whether the plaintiffs' general causation evidence could go to a jury.
The court's rulings on the Designated Cancers
General causation asks whether a substance can cause a disease at all. The court ruled: “On December 6, 2022, the Court entered an Omnibus Order [DE 6120] granting Brand Defendants’ Daubert motions on general causation relating to all Designated Cancers” (Pretrial Order No. 81, In re Zantac (Ranitidine) Products Liability Litigation, MDL No. 2924, No. 9:20-md-2924-RLR, ECF No. 6271 (S.D. Fla. Feb. 14, 2023)) in this MDL.
Summary judgment followed. The court wrote that “On May 15, 2023, the Court entered summary judgment in all personal injury Designated Cancer” (Tentative Ruling Entering Rule 58 Final Judgment, In re Zantac (Ranitidine) Products Liability Litigation, MDL No. 2924, No. 9:20-md-2924-RLR, ECF No. 6787, at 1 (S.D. Fla. July 21, 2023)) “cases in favor of every Defendant, provided the cases were filed prior to May 5, 2023.” (Tentative Ruling Entering Rule 58 Final Judgment, In re Zantac (Ranitidine) Products Liability Litigation, MDL No. 2924, No. 9:20-md-2924-RLR, ECF No. 6787, at 1 (S.D. Fla. July 21, 2023))
And it moved to final judgment: “In light of the summary judgment ruling, the Court ruled that every Defendant was entitled to the entry of a Rule 58 final judgment.” (Tentative Ruling Entering Rule 58 Final Judgment, In re Zantac (Ranitidine) Products Liability Litigation, MDL No. 2924, No. 9:20-md-2924-RLR, ECF No. 6787, at 1 (S.D. Fla. July 21, 2023)) It issued that as a tentative ruling first: “This Order serves as the tentative ruling, to which any party may object.” (Tentative Ruling Entering Rule 58 Final Judgment, In re Zantac (Ranitidine) Products Liability Litigation, MDL No. 2924, No. 9:20-md-2924-RLR, ECF No. 6787, at 1 (S.D. Fla. July 21, 2023))
Other cancers and later-filed cases
For cancers outside the five, the court set steps: “Individual Plaintiffs shall file a Notice of Non-Designated Cancers each Plaintiff intends to pursue, if any, and will certify his or her intent to provide general causation expert reports on the Non-Designated Cancer(s).” (Pretrial Order No. 81, In re Zantac (Ranitidine) Products Liability Litigation, MDL No. 2924, No. 9:20-md-2924-RLR, ECF No. 6271 (S.D. Fla. Feb. 14, 2023)) It added: “a Plaintiff may not author his or her own expert report, unless the pro se Plaintiff has sufficient scientific credentials to qualify the Plaintiff as competent to testify on general causation.” (Pretrial Order No. 81, In re Zantac (Ranitidine) Products Liability Litigation, MDL No. 2924, No. 9:20-md-2924-RLR, ECF No. 6271 (S.D. Fla. Feb. 14, 2023))
And it said what follows a missed step: “If any Plaintiff fails to meet the requirements and deadlines established by this Order, his or her action may be subject to dismissal with prejudice under Rule 41(b).” (Pretrial Order No. 81, In re Zantac (Ranitidine) Products Liability Litigation, MDL No. 2924, No. 9:20-md-2924-RLR, ECF No. 6271 (S.D. Fla. Feb. 14, 2023))
For Designated Cancer cases filed later, the court required: “Plaintiffs in this MDL who allege certain cancers must show cause why summary judgment should not be entered in his or her individual case.” (Pretrial Order No. 84, In re Zantac (Ranitidine) Products Liability Litigation, MDL No. 2924, No. 9:20-md-2924-RLR, ECF No. 6923 (S.D. Fla. Aug. 21, 2023))
What has happened since
No appeal decision and no ruling after the latest order quoted on this page was read, so this page says nothing about what followed.
The Panel's report of October 1, 2026 lists 847 actions still pending in the MDL, and 15,018 in total since it began. The figures are the report's, as of its date, and this page prints them with that date.
The records a claim rests on
A claim of this kind turns on the product and the diagnosis: pharmacy records or receipts showing which ranitidine products were used and when, the pathology report naming the cancer and where it began, and the treatment records and bills.
Keep them together, with the dates. A lawyer will ask for them first.
Where the federal cases are
The MDL is No. 2924, before Judge Robin L. Rosenberg, master docket 9:20-md-2924. The Panel's report lists the date transferred as February 6, 2020.
What this page does not say about money
No document read for this page describes a settlement, a verdict or a trial figure in this MDL, so this page states none and does not estimate one.
What the checker above does is add up the costs you can document, so you have one figure to bring to a lawyer. It is the sum of what you enter and nothing else.
Talking to a lawyer about a Zantac lawsuit
This site is not a law firm, does not refer anyone to a lawyer, and cannot say what a claim would recover. The questions that decide a claim are a lawyer's: what the court's rulings mean for it, what has happened since, and whether any court would hear it now.
Bring the product and pharmacy records, the pathology and treatment records, your record of costs, and the orders this page quotes.