Testosterone: What to Ask About a Claim in Texas

Texas TRT cases filed in federal court were transferred to MDL 2545 in the Northern District of Illinois before Judge Matthew Kennelly. Given AbbVie's significant market presence in Texas — one of the top AndroGel states by prescription volume — a substantial portion of MDL 2545 plaintiffs are Texas residents. The MDL reached global settlements with the primary defendants and is no longer on the JPML's list of pending MDLs (Oct. 1, 2026 report); an attorney can say whether any route remains for a new claim.

Texas imposes a two-year statute of limitations for personal injury and products liability claims under Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code § 16.003. The discovery rule defers accrual until the plaintiff discovered or should have discovered that the injury was caused by TRT use. Texas courts apply a subjective/objective standard: the limitations clock begins when a reasonable person in the plaintiff's position would have investigated causation. Post-2015 FDA warning, constructive knowledge arguments by defendants require careful rebuttal with individualized medical records.

Texas ranks among the highest states for TRT prescriptions, driven by a large male population, an active men's health and low-T clinic industry (including national chains headquartered in Texas), and high rates of cardiovascular disease. Houston, Dallas–Fort Worth, San Antonio, and Austin all have significant populations of men who received TRT prescriptions between 2008 and 2016. Texas cardiology centers treated many TRT-related cardiovascular events, and medical records from these institutions are key evidence in individual cases.

Texas plaintiffs may file in Texas state district courts or in federal district courts within Texas (N.D. Tex., S.D. Tex., E.D. Tex., W.D. Tex.). MDL 2545 (N.D. Ill.) is no longer on the JPML's list of pending MDLs (Oct. 1, 2026 report). The Southern District of Texas (Houston Division) and Northern District of Texas (Dallas Division) are common originating venues. Texas does not recognize a separate discovery rule exception for products liability by statute, but courts have applied it through the common-law discovery rule in TRT and similar pharmaceutical litigation.