Preview Newsletter
Ethicon 12/10
-
Boston Scientific mesh verdict slashed to $10 million
Oct 9, 2015 | Reuters
By Jessica Dye
A Delaware judge on Friday said Boston Scientific should only have to pay $10 million to a woman originally awarded $100 million by a jury who found she was injured by transvaginal mesh, a device that is the subject of thousands of lawsuits. -
$100M Boston Scientific Mesh Verdict Slashed To $10M
Oct 9, 2015 | Law360
By Dani Kass
A Delaware state judge on Friday slashed the $100 million verdict against Boston Scientific Corp. in a case over injuries from the company’s pelvic mesh to just $10 million after finding that the verdict is excessive, but refused to grant a new trial. -
Boston Scientific mesh verdict slashed to $10 million
Oct 9, 2015 | Mass Device
A Delaware judge on Friday said Boston Scientific (NYSE:BSX) should only have to pay $10 million to a woman originally awarded $100 million by a jury who found she was injured by transvaginal mesh, a device that is the subject of thousands of lawsuits.
Client Attorney Privileged/Attorney Work Product/At Request of Counsel
Online Sources
-
Boston Scientific mesh verdict slashed to $10 million
Oct 9, 2015 | Reuters
By Jessica Dye
A Delaware judge on Friday said Boston Scientific should only have to pay $10 million to a woman originally awarded $100 million by a jury who found she was injured by transvaginal mesh, a device that is the subject of thousands of lawsuits.
Judge Mary Johnston in New Castle County, Delaware, said that the damages awarded to plaintiff Deborah Barba in May – the largest ever in a trial involving transvaginal mesh - were “grossly disproportionate to the injuries suffered and shock the court’s conscience and sense of justice.”
But Johnston denied Boston Scientific's bid to set aside the verdict altogether and order a new trial. While the jury had properly decided the company's liability, Johnston wrote in her ruling that the jury’s award was too high, particularly in comparison with the other mesh trials, in which punitive damages awards spanned from $1.75 million to $7.76 million.
Boston Scientific spokesman Tom Keppeler said the company intends to appeal the verdict because it believes there were factual and legal errors.
A lawyer for Barba, Fred Thompson of Motley Rice, said he was not surprised the judge would scrutinize the size of the damages. While disappointed with the reduction, Thompson said he was pleased that Johnston upheld the jury’s finding on Boston Scientific’s liability and considered the decision a hurdle in what was expected to be a lengthy post-trial process.
According to her 2011 lawsuit, Barba was implanted with Boston Scientific’s Pinnacle and Advantage Fit mesh devices in 2009 to treat pelvic organ prolapse and stress urinary incontinence. The devices caused serious complications, including recurring bladder infections and pelvic and abdominal pain, requiring her to undergo two additional surgeries to try to address the problems, she said.
Following a 14-day trial in May, jurors in Delaware state court found Boston Scientific had been negligent in designing and making the devices and that it had failed to warn doctors and patients about the potential risks. They awarded her $25 million in compensatory damages, and an additional $75 million in punitive damages.
Boston Scientific is among seven device manufacturers that have collectively faced an estimated 100,000 lawsuits in state and federal court over transvaginal mesh. Other major defendants include Johnson & Johnson’s Ethicon unit and C.R. Bard.
-
$100M Boston Scientific Mesh Verdict Slashed To $10M
Oct 9, 2015 | Law360
By Dani Kass
A Delaware state judge on Friday slashed the $100 million verdict against Boston Scientific Corp. in a case over injuries from the company’s pelvic mesh to just $10 million after finding that the verdict is excessive, but refused to grant a new trial.
The $25 million in compensatory damages for plaintiff Deborah Barba and $75 million in punitive damages are out of line, U.S. District Judge Mary M. Johnston said. Given the financial claims made by Barba, $2.5 million is more appropriate, Judge Johnston ruled. She upheld the ratio of compensatory to punitive damages, bringing the new punitive amount to $7.5 million.
“The court concludes that remittitur must be granted because the verdict is sufficiently out of proportion to the injury so as to shock the court’s conscience and sense of justice,” Judge Johnston said.
Boston Scientific had submitted motions for a new trial, to set aside the verdict and for remittitur, during which it argued that the $75 million was “grossly excessive.” Counsel for Barba held that the award properly punished the company and deterred such actions in the future.
“Plaintiffs contend that the large size, alone, is not enough to prove prejudice and passion in the jury’s award determination, especially when considering Boston Scientific’s net worth,” they said.
For the compensatory damages, Judge Johnston said the amount was too high, but rejected Boston Scientific’s claim that it included a punitive magnifier. Barba’s past medical expenses had totaled just over $45,000, the judge said, and she hasn’t looked for or received medical treatment in at least four years and has presented no claim for future medical expenses or lost wages.
Judge Johnston held that the jury’s liability verdict was proper given the evidence presented over the 14-day trial.
Barba had surgery in May 2009 to implant the company's Advantage Fit and Pinnacle mesh products to treat pelvic organ prolapse and urinary incontinence. Afterwards, she suffered serious complications that required two surgeries, her attorneys say.
Barba initially sued the doctor who performed the procedure for malpractice in August 2011, but dropped those claims and instead filed suit against Boston Scientific in January 2012.
She accused the company of negligent product design, negligent manufacturing, failure to warn, breach of implied warranty of merchantability, fraud, fraud by concealment, violations of Delaware consumer protection law and loss of consortium.
The jury found in favor of Barba on all but the loss of consortium claim.
Boston Scientific said they intend to appeal the decision.
“We appreciate that the trial court reduced the verdict by 90 percent; however, we believe there were factual and legal errors underlying the verdict,” the company said in a statement.
Fidelma Fitzpatrick of Motley Rice LLC, who represented Barba, said overall they’re pleased that Judge Johnston upheld the verdict.
“The judge clearly understood and comprehended just the wealth of evidence that we have to support each of the claims in the case,” Fitzpatrick told Law360. “That’s what we’re focusing on. “
However, the firm will be looking into what steps to take in regards to the remittitur.
“The money was certainly was nice, I cant pretend it was not, but there were two motions,” she said. “One would have taken away the entire verdict altogether and that was the one that we won.”
Barba is represented by Fidelma Fitzpatrick and Fred Thompson of Motley Rice LLC and Philip T. Edwards of Murphy & Landon.
Boston Scientific is represented by Colleen D. Shields of Eckert Seamans Cherin & Mellott LLC and Matthew D. Keenan and Eric Anielak of Shook Hardy & Bacon LLP.
The case is Deborah Barba v. Boston Scientific Corp., case number N11C-08-050 MMJ, in the Superior Court of the State of Delaware in New Castle County. -
Boston Scientific mesh verdict slashed to $10 million
Oct 9, 2015 | Mass Device
A Delaware judge on Friday said Boston Scientific (NYSE:BSX) should only have to pay $10 million to a woman originally awarded $100 million by a jury who found she was injured by transvaginal mesh, a device that is the subject of thousands of lawsuits.
Judge Mary Johnston in New Castle County, Delaware, said that the damages awarded to plaintiff Deborah Barba in May – the largest ever in a trial involving transvaginal mesh – were “grossly disproportionate to the injuries suffered and shock the court’s conscience and sense of justice.”
But Johnston denied Boston Scientific’s bid to set aside the verdict altogether and order a new trial. While the jury had properly decided the company’s liability, Johnston wrote in her ruling that the jury’s award was too high, particularly in comparison with the other mesh trials, in which punitive damages awards spanned from $1.75 million to $7.76 million.
Boston Scientific spokesman Tom Keppeler said the company intends to appeal the verdict because it believes there were factual and legal errors.
A lawyer for Barba, Fred Thompson of Motley Rice, said he was not surprised the judge would scrutinize the size of the damages. While disappointed with the reduction, Thompson said he was pleased that Johnston upheld the jury’s finding on Boston Scientific’s liability and considered the decision a hurdle in what was expected to be a lengthy post-trial process.
According to her 2011 lawsuit, Barba was implanted with Boston Scientific’s Pinnacle and Advantage Fit mesh devices in 2009 to treat pelvic organ prolapse and stress urinary incontinence. The devices caused serious complications, including recurring bladder infections and pelvic and abdominal pain, requiring her to undergo two additional surgeries to try to address the problems, she said.
Following a 14-day trial in May, jurors in Delaware state court found Boston Scientific had been negligent in designing and making the devices and that it had failed to warn doctors and patients about the potential risks. They awarded her $25 million in compensatory damages, and an additional $75 million in punitive damages.
Boston Scientific is among seven device manufacturers that have collectively faced an estimated 100,000 lawsuits in state and federal court over transvaginal mesh. Other major defendants include Johnson & Johnson’s Ethicon unit and C.R. Bard.
Client Attorney Privileged/Attorney Work Product/At Request of Counsel
Online Sources
Add recipients
Suggested