About Gladys Santana

Gladys Proa Santana is Senior Counsel at Wagstaff Law Firm and an experienced advocate for clients harmed by defective medical devices and pharmaceutical drugs, workplace injuries, and automobile accidents. With more than 10 years of experience in pharmaceutical and medical device litigation, she has represented thousands of clients in complex mass torts and has headed litigation dockets including Actos, Pradaxa, IVC Filter, Taxotere, Talcum Powder, and Tobacco. Her litigation work spans the Cook Medical and Bard IVC filter MDLs, Pradaxa litigation in Connecticut state court, and the Actos and DePuy ASR litigations in Illinois state court, with results including a $2.4 billion resolution on behalf of individuals injured by a defective diabetes drug, a $12.2 million recovery for women injured by a defective contraceptive device, and a $7.6 million products liability settlement.

She volunteers as a Court Appointed Special Advocate for abused and neglected children with CASA Kane County and is fluent in Spanish. A board member of the Society of Women Trial Lawyers, she has been named a Super Lawyers Rising Star since 2018 and recognized by Best Lawyers in America since 2022. She earned both her J.D. and B.A. from Northern Illinois University and is admitted in Illinois and the Northern and Southern Districts of Illinois.

Proven verdicts and settlements at Wagstaff Law Firm

These results are credited to Wagstaff Law Firm. A result appears under an attorney's own name only when a published source names them as counsel on the case.

$67.35 millionVerdictTop 20 in Colorado · #3

A Denver jury awarded $67,349,380 in July 2024 after a seven-month-old suffered permanent brain damage when a cardiothoracic surgeon accidentally tied off the infant's aorta during open-heart surgery and the perfusionists failed to detect the resulting loss of blood flow for more than seven hours.

Denver County District Court, Colorado · 2024Medical MalpracticeRead the full story →
$25.27 millionVerdict

Edwin Hardeman, 70, sprayed Roundup on his Sonoma County property for about 26 years and was diagnosed with non-Hodgkin lymphoma in 2015. In the first federal Roundup bellwether trial, a unanimous San Francisco jury found in March 2019 that the herbicide was a substantial factor in his cancer and that Monsanto failed to warn, awarding $5,267,634 in compensatory damages and $75 million in punitive damages. Judge Vince Chhabria cut the punitive award to $20 million as constitutionally excessive, leaving a $25,267,634 judgment. The Ninth Circuit affirmed in May 2021 and the U.S. Supreme Court denied Monsanto's petition in June 2022.

U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, San Francisco · 2019Product LiabilityRead the full story →

Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Each case is unique and depends on its own facts.

Practice areas

Education

Northern Illinois University College of Law
J.D.
Northern Illinois University
Undergraduate

Bar admissions & credentials

State Bar of Illinois

Other attorneys at Wagstaff Law Firm

View firm →

Proven verdicts and settlements from other Denver firms

Leventhal Puga Braley
Leventhal Puga Braley
$67.35 Million Colorado Record for Infant Brain-Damaged When Surgeon Tied Off Aorta in Heart Surgery
Bachus & Schanker, Personal Injury Lawyers
Bachus & Schanker, Personal Injury Lawyers
$27.6 Million Verdict for Newborn Whose E. Coli Sepsis Went Untreated at North Colorado Medical Center
Zaner Law Personal Injury and Car Accident Attorneys
Zaner Law Personal Injury and Car Accident Attorneys
$16 Million Verdict for Electrocuted Flooring Worker, Colorado's Largest Premises Liability Award
Chod Law, LLC
Chod Law, LLC
$9.3 million · Jury Awards Lincoln Railcar Repairer $9.3 Million After BNSF Crane Accident Left Him With Spine Injuries
Dormer Harpring Denver Personal Injury Lawyers
Dormer Harpring Denver Personal Injury Lawyers
$4 million · Federal Jury Awards $4 Million After Saguache County Jail Staff Ignored Inmate's Suicidal Warnings

Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Each case is unique and depends on its own facts.