Have there been lawsuits filed against Dr. Eric Berg or his clinic for medical malpractice?

1. Disciplinary action and regulatory findings — documentary evidence of misconduct claims

A detailed Quackwatch summary recounts that Virginia regulators noticed Dr. Berg for an informal conference and concluded he used unproven diagnostic/treatment claims (BRT) and failed to provide clinical test documentation to investigators; the write-up lists specific Virginia code sections the Board alleged he violated ^[1]. That record is regulatory/advisory in nature and reflects state concern about his clinical claims and evidence practices ^[1].

2. Civil litigation involving Berg — a named lawsuit and other court filings

Court dockets show a civil suit titled Dr. Eric Berg, D.C. v. Dr. Jacob Torres on CourtListener, demonstrating Berg has been a party to federal litigation ^[2]. The available search results also include appellate docket entries in Minnesota involving “Eric Berg, et al.” as respondents ^[6], indicating Berg or affiliated entities have been involved in multiple court matters ^[6]. The specific facts and outcomes of all those cases are not detailed in the provided snippets.

3. Business-related legal actions — consumer and regulatory settlements

A California Attorney General/P65 docket PDF names The Health & Wellness Center, Inc., doing business as Dr. Berg Nutritionals, in a judgment file, indicating Berg’s business entities faced state regulatory action and resulting legal documentation ^[3]. A class-action information PDF (Scheibe v. Dr. Berg Holdings, LLC d/b/a Dr. Berg Nutritionals) shows class-action activity tied to his supplement business ^[4]. Those items concern product/consumer law and public-health disclosures rather than a straightforward clinical malpractice trial outcome ^{[3] [4]}.

4. Consumer complaints and reputational material — patterns but not court judgments

The Better Business Bureau lists multiple consumer complaints alleging dangerous advice, unqualified treatment, and adverse outcomes; reviewers and Trustpilot posts allege harms, misleading information, and prior fines, but those pages are complaint-driven and not formal malpractice judgments ^{[5] [7]}. Consumer platforms document dissatisfaction and alleged harms but do not substitute for court findings of medical malpractice ^{[5] [7]}.

5. What the sources do not establish — no clear published medical-malpractice verdicts in these results

The assembled sources document regulatory notices, civil suits, business judgments, and consumer complaints ^{[1] [2] [3] [4] [5]}. Available sources do not mention a definitive, published medical-malpractice verdict against Dr. Eric Berg or his clinic in the provided set. They also do not supply full case outcomes or settlement details for every docket listed (not found in current reporting).

6. Competing interpretations and implicit agendas

Regulatory and consumer records portray Berg as a controversial figure with alleged misuse of clinical claims ^{[1] [5]}. Supporters might point to litigated defenses or business settlements as normal in high-profile supplement enterprises; critics emphasize regulatory findings and many consumer complaints as evidence of risk ^{[1] [5] [7]}. Some sources (consumer reviews) contain charged language and unverified allegations — note those platforms mix anecdote and assertion without court adjudication ^[7].

7. Practical takeaway — how to evaluate further

For anyone assessing malpractice risk or pursuing legal recourse, the relevant next steps are to obtain full court dockets and judgments for the cited cases (e.g., the CourtListener docket) and the complete California judgment and class-action filings referenced here ^{[2] [3] [4]}. Consumer complaints and regulatory summaries are informative for patterns but are not definitive proof of malpractice absent court rulings ^{[1] [5]}.

Limitations: This analysis uses only the supplied search results and cites those documents; I do not assert facts beyond what those items show.