Our firm is about people. That is our motto and that will always be our reality.
We do our best to get to know our clients, understand their situations, and get them the compensation they deserve.
At TorHoerman Law, we believe that if we continue to focus on the people that we represent, and continue to be true to the people that we are – justice will always be served.
Without our team, we would’nt be able to provide our clients with anything close to the level of service they receive when they work with us.
The TorHoerman Law Team commits to the sincere belief that those injured by the misconduct of others, especially large corporate profit mongers, deserve justice for their injuries.
Our team is what has made TorHoerman Law a very special place since 2009.
Rybelsus lawsuit claims center on allegations that the drug may be linked to serious adverse health outcomes.
These claims often involve potentially linked health issues such as severe gastrointestinal complications, including gastroparesis, ileus, and intestinal obstruction, as well as vision loss.
TorHoerman Law is reviewing claims from individuals who have suffered gastrointestinal problems and/or vision loss after taking Rybelsus.
Rybelsus (oral semaglutide) is a prescription GLP-1 receptor agonist manufactured by Novo Nordisk and approved to treat type 2 diabetes.
In recent years, the drug has been named in lawsuits alleging that some patients experienced severe symptoms affecting the gastrointestinal system after taking Rybelsus as prescribed.
Plaintiffs bringing gastroparesis claims and other gastrointestinal injury allegations contend that the medication’s effect on gastric emptying contributed to persistent nausea, vomiting, abdominal pain, and impaired digestion.
As Rybelsus and Ozempic lawsuits filed across the country increased, these cases were centralized within federal multidistrict litigation to address overlapping factual and scientific questions.
The litigation focuses on whether drug manufacturers adequately warned about the potential risk of serious gastrointestinal complications associated with GLP-1 medications.
Filing lawsuits does not require proof of wrongdoing in advance, but it does require medical records showing use of the drug and a diagnosed injury consistent with the allegations.
Each case is evaluated individually based on the patient’s treatment history, symptom timeline, and objective testing.
A law firm reviewing Rybelsus claims typically examines these records to determine whether the evidence supports inclusion in the broader GLP-1 litigation.
If you took Rybelsus (oral semaglutide) and later developed severe gastrointestinal problems, especially symptoms consistent with delayed stomach emptying, or experienced sudden vision changes, you deserve a clear, records-based review of what happened.
Contact TorHoerman Law for a free consultation.
Use the chat feature on this page today for a free, confidential case review.
Rybelsus is an oral GLP-1 receptor agonist containing semaglutide, the same active ingredient used in Ozempic, and is manufactured by Novo Nordisk.
Lawsuits involving Rybelsus fall within a broader wave of litigation against drug companies that market GLP-1 medications, with allegations centered on serious gastrointestinal and neurological injuries.
Plaintiffs allege that these drugs can cause gastroparesis (stomach paralysis), delayed gastric emptying, and other severe complications that extend well beyond temporary or expected side effects.
Many lawsuits assert that while GLP-1 drugs were designed to slow digestion, the severity, duration, and clinical consequences of these effects were not adequately disclosed to patients or prescribing physicians.
Some filings also raise concerns about vision loss, including optic nerve injuries, which are being addressed in separate but related federal proceedings.
The core legal theory across these cases is a failure-to-warn claim, grounded in what manufacturers knew or should have known based on available data.
According to the allegations, information from clinical trials, post-marketing surveillance, and regulatory communications should have prompted stronger warnings about serious gastrointestinal risks.
Regulatory scrutiny has expanded internationally, with agencies such as the European Medicines Agency examining safety signals associated with GLP-1 medications.
More than 3,000 active lawsuits have been filed against Novo Nordisk related to Ozempic and other GLP-1 drugs, reflecting the growing scope of this litigation trend.
Rybelsus claims are being coordinated with related cases through federal multidistrict litigation (MDL), which centralizes shared factual and scientific issues while preserving individual injury claims.

Allegations commonly raised in Rybelsus and related GLP-1 lawsuits include:
Together, these allegations place Rybelsus within a larger legal examination of GLP-1 drug safety and the adequacy of risk disclosures made to patients and healthcare providers.
GLP-1 drugs have seen rapid growth in use as both a weight loss drug option and a diabetes treatment, with many patients using them for weight loss and long-term metabolic goals under medical supervision.

Other GLP-1 drugs named in related litigation commonly include:
As GLP-1 medications have become more widely prescribed (both as weight loss medications and as a prescription drug option for diabetes), medical researchers and clinicians have published and discussed complications that can extend beyond temporary nausea.
The current wave of lawsuits filed (including federal lawsuits) builds on that growing body of discussion, along with adverse event reports, and frames these issues as alleged severe outcomes that warrant closer scrutiny.

In the Rybelsus lawsuit and other lawsuits involving Ozempic and related semaglutide drugs, plaintiffs typically point to medical evidence such as symptom timelines, ER visits, and specialist diagnoses, rather than relying on general complaints.
The litigation tends to focus on documented gastrointestinal adverse reactions and other severe injuries supported by objective medical testing, while defendants dispute causation and emphasize case-specific factors.
Many gastroparesis lawsuits and related filings involve claims of serious gastrointestinal motility disorders, not mild appetite suppression or brief nausea during dose escalation.
Plaintiffs allege gastroparesis (also known as stomach paralysis), a condition where the stomach does not move food normally, leading to delayed emptying and symptoms that can become disabling.
Another core injury is ileus, where the intestines slow or stop and symptoms can resemble an intestinal blockage, sometimes requiring urgent evaluation.
Complaints also commonly reference obstruction or pseudo-obstruction patterns, where patients report worsening abdominal pain, distension, and inability to pass stool or gas, along with repeat medical visits and escalating treatment needs.
In many cases, the proof centers on objective medical testing (for example, a gastric emptying study) and records documenting ER care and medical intervention.

Gastrointestinal complications commonly alleged include:
Some reported cases and subsequent claims allege an association between GLP-1 use and non-arteritic anterior ischemic optic neuropathy (NAION), which is why you may see references to Ozempic vision loss lawsuits alongside GI allegations.
NAION is an eye condition involving reduced blood supply to the optic nerve; it often presents as sudden, painless vision loss or a shadow/curtain effect in one eye, sometimes noticed upon waking.
Because the injury reflects ischemic damage to optic nerve tissue, vision changes may be sudden and, in some cases, progress to permanent vision loss despite treatment, making it a very different category of allegation than gastrointestinal symptoms.

Procedurally, these vision-loss cases are being handled separately from the GI claims.
The U.S. Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation created a distinct MDL for NAION allegations involving GLP-1 medications in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania.
That means the NAION cases proceed on their own track in federal court, while the GI cases remain centralized in the separate GLP-1 gastrointestinal MDL.
If you took Rybelsus and later began to develop severe digestive problems or vision changes, you may be eligible to file a claim within the broader GLP-1 legal process.
Rybelsus is an oral semaglutide product from manufacturer Novo Nordisk, and complaints involving Ozempic, Wegovy, and Rybelsus generally focus on alleged outcomes more serious than short-term nausea.
Many lawsuits allege that some patients experienced severe gastrointestinal injuries such as persistent vomiting, repeated emergency room visits, and worsening stomach pain that required escalated care.
Other claims center on motility disorders, including suspected or diagnosed intestinal obstruction, ileus-like symptoms, or patterns described as cyclic vomiting syndrome, depending on what clinicians documented.
Some people seek review after sudden vision changes tied to reduced blood flow to the optic nerve, including NAION-type allegations.
Qualification may depend on documented diagnoses, treatment history, and objective testing reflected in your medical records.

It also matters when symptoms started compared to when you used the drug and whether your providers documented a consistent progression.
Even if you were one of many Ozempic users who later switched therapies (or used Ozempic, Wegovy or other drugs before or after Rybelsus), each case is evaluated individually under the same umbrella framework, including proceedings coordinated by the panel on multidistrict litigation.
Evidence is critical in GLP-1 cases because attorneys must connect the alleged injury to a clear timeline and clinical proof, not just symptom reports.
Most reviews start with medication exposure (exact start/stop dates and dosing), then compare that timeline to symptom onset and escalation.
Diagnosis matters, and lawyers look for diagnostic confirmation (imaging, endoscopy findings, gastric motility testing, and ophthalmology workups) that supports what is being claimed.
Consistent documentation also helps counsel evaluate issues like causation, alternative explanations, and whether the product labeling adequately warned about the risks alleged.

Common evidence includes:
In pharmaceutical injury cases, “damages” refers to the losses a person claims resulted from the alleged injury.
Attorneys evaluate damages by reviewing medical records, bills, prognosis, and how the condition affected daily function, work capacity, and long-term care needs.
The value of any claim depends on the specific facts: the severity of symptoms, whether hospitalization or procedures occurred, and whether treatment is still ongoing.
In severe GI cases, damages may turn on the scope of care required for gastrointestinal risks that allegedly progressed into serious motility disorders; in vision cases, it may hinge on functional impairment tied to optic nerve injury and related limitations.
Lawyers also consider whether a patient used other “popular weight loss drugs” in the same class and how that impacts the timeline and proof in the case.

Potential damages may include:
TorHoerman Law is investigating claims involving alleged GLP-1-related gastrointestinal injuries and vision loss, including cases involving Rybelsus and other semaglutide products such as Ozempic Wegovy.
Our review starts with your medication history, symptom timeline, and the clinical testing that supports (or rules out) a motility disorder or optic nerve event.
We look closely at what your treating providers documented (diagnoses, objective findings, and the treatment required after symptoms escalated), because these cases rise and fall on medical proof.

If you believe you experienced severe GI complications or vision changes after using Rybelsus, our team can walk you through the next steps and provide a free consultation based on the medical evidence you have.
Contact our team today, or use the chatbot on this page.
Rybelsus and Ozempic are not the same product, even though both contain semaglutide.
Rybelsus is oral semaglutide (a tablet), while Ozempic is semaglutide by injection, and the dosing schedules and administration instructions differ.
Because the active ingredient overlaps, discussions about GLP-1 allegations may reference both, but legal and medical review still has to track which product, what dose, and when you took it.
Yes.
Procedurally, Rybelsus is included in the federal GI-injury GLP-1 MDL, where claims are being handled alongside other GLP-1 drug cases.
The point of consolidation is efficiency in pretrial issues (discovery, expert disputes, motion practice), not a ruling that any drug caused any particular injury.
Rybelsus claims are addressed with other GLP-1 claims because they share similar mechanisms and alleged injury themes.
That’s common, and it doesn’t automatically disqualify a claim.
Attorneys usually reconstruct your full GLP-1 exposure history: start/stop dates, dose changes, switches (e.g., between Rybelsus and Ozempic/Wegovy), and when symptoms began or worsened.
The goal is to evaluate whether the medical records support one product, multiple products, or another explanation, case by case.
Rybelsus lawsuits typically allege that some users experienced serious medical complications after taking the drug as prescribed, supported by documented symptoms, diagnostic testing, and treatment records.
Many claims focus on severe gastrointestinal injuries that plaintiffs say progressed beyond expected side effects and required emergency care, hospitalization, or specialist treatment.
Some filings describe severe gastroparesis, sometimes referred to as stomach paralysis, along with related motility disorders such as ileus or obstruction-like episodes.
Separate allegations in GLP-1 litigation also involve eye conditions that plaintiffs associate with sudden vision loss, and those claims are generally handled in a distinct federal track.
A smaller number of complaints reference other reported events, including deep vein thrombosis, though the central focus in most cases remains gastrointestinal and vision-related allegations.
Common injuries alleged in Rybelsus and related GLP-1 lawsuits include:
Most Rybelsus cases focus on serious gastrointestinal injuries documented in medical records, not temporary side effects that resolve quickly with routine care.
Attorneys reviewing gastrointestinal injury claims typically look for evidence that symptoms persisted, escalated, or required emergency treatment, hospitalization, or specialist evaluation.
Medical proof matters, including diagnostic testing, treating-provider notes, and a timeline that links Rybelsus use to the onset of severe gastrointestinal adverse reactions.
A claim is usually stronger when the records reflect objective findings such as imaging, endoscopy results, or motility testing, rather than self-reported symptoms alone.
If you are unsure whether your experience fits the pattern alleged in these cases, a free case review can help evaluate your medical documentation and exposure history.
Plaintiffs in the Ozempic lawsuits seek compensation for injuries they attribute to the drug, including medical expenses and loss of quality of life.
The lawsuits allege that Novo Nordisk failed to adequately warn patients and doctors about the risk of severe gastrointestinal side effects, including gastroparesis and ileus, despite information plaintiffs claim the company knew or should have known.
The FDA has updated Ozempic’s labeling to include warnings about serious gastrointestinal complications, including ileus, and the current prescribing information reflects those risks.
The legal proceedings remain ongoing, with many cases consolidated in federal court through multidistrict litigation to streamline coordinated discovery and other pretrial issues.
Owner & Attorney - TorHoerman Law
Here, at TorHoerman Law, we’re committed to helping victims get the justice they deserve.
Since 2009, we have successfully collected over $4 Billion in verdicts and settlements on behalf of injured individuals.
Would you like our help?
At TorHoerman Law, we believe that if we continue to focus on the people that we represent, and continue to be true to the people that we are – justice will always be served.
Do you believe you’re entitled to compensation?
Use our Instant Case Evaluator to find out in as little as 60 seconds!
In this case, we obtained a verdict of $495 Million for our client’s child who was diagnosed with Necrotizing Enterocolitis after consuming baby formula manufactured by Abbott Laboratories.
In this case, we were able to successfully recover $20 Million for our client after they suffered a Toxic Tort Injury due to chemical exposure.
In this case, we were able to successfully recover $103.8 Million for our client after they suffered a COX-2 Inhibitors Injury.
In this case, we were able to successfully recover $4 Million for our client after they suffered a Traumatic Brain Injury while at daycare.
In this case, we were able to successfully recover $2.8 Million for our client after they suffered an injury due to a Defective Heart Device.
Here, at TorHoerman Law, we’re committed to helping victims get the justice they deserve.
Since 2009, we have successfully collected over $4 Billion in verdicts and settlements on behalf of injured individuals.
Would you like our help?