Preview Newsletter
ethicon oct 14
-
Dozens Of Pelvic Mesh Suits To Join J&J MDL In W.Va.
Oct 13, 2015 | Law360
By John Kennedy
Despite protests, more than 60 suits alleging Johnson & Johnson's Ethicon Inc. defectively designed, manufactured and marketed transvaginal mesh devices will be added to one of seven similar multidistrict litigations in West Virginia federal court, the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litgation said Tuesday. -
Sponsored by Sprint Delaware Judge Slashes $100M Boston Scientific Mesh Verdict to $10M
Oct 13, 2015 | Insurance Journal
By Jessica Dye
A Delaware judge on Oct. 9 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. -
Texas Woman Files Lawsuit Over Vaginal Mesh Complications
Oct 13, 2015 | Top Class Actions
By Ashley Vanover
A Texas woman has added her Vaginal mesh lawsuit to the ongoing litigation against Ethicon and Johnson & Johnson, alleging that the medical device manufacturers fraudulently concealed the serious risks of their vaginal mesh devices. According to the Vaginal Mesh MDL, Ethicon negligently manufactured and marketed defective...
Client Attorney Privileged/Attorney Work Product/At Request of Counsel
Full Text of Stories Below
-
Dozens Of Pelvic Mesh Suits To Join J&J MDL In W.Va.
Oct 13, 2015 | Law360
By John Kennedy
Despite protests, more than 60 suits alleging Johnson & Johnson's Ethicon Inc. defectively designed, manufactured and marketed transvaginal mesh devices will be added to one of seven similar multidistrict litigations in West Virginia federal court, the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litgation said Tuesday.
Although they didn't deny their suits shared common factual questions with the actions previously transferred to MDL No. 2327, the plaintiffs wanted the panel to vacate its conditional transfer orders for other reasons. Those from the Northern District of Texas said that the MDL is too far along, those from the Eastern District of Kentucky said the transferor courts should be allowed to rule on pending jurisdictional motions, and those from the Central District of California made both arguments.
“While the relative merits of transferring new tag-along actions to an MDL can change over time, plaintiffs have not demonstrated that transfer would not promote the just and efficient conduct of the litigation,” the panel said, addressing the first argument and noting that the MDL's discovery and pretrial proceedings have not yet been completed.
Regarding the second argument, the panel stuck to its own precedent, holding that jurisdictional issues aren't an impediment to transfer because those arguments can be presented to the transferee judge.
Like many of the already-centralized actions, the claims arise from allegations that the mishandling of the transvaginal mesh by Ethicon and related entities resulted in serious injuries to recipient patients and that Ethicon and the others didn't provide appropriate warnings and instructions regarding the risks and dangers posed by the devices.
The MDL is one of seven containing a total of more than 70,000 cases assigned to U.S. District Judge Joseph R. Goodwin over the devices, which are used to treat pelvic organ prolapse and stress urinary incontinence — the unintentional loss of urine as a result of physical pressure on the bladder.
Last week, Ethicon said that a deluge of individual discovery requests over the MDL amounted to harassment since fact sheets aren't due until mid-November. The company said it has been unable to focus on preparing for trial as a result of the onslaught of thousands of individual discovery requests, which it called an “abuse of the discovery process” and asked the court to confirm that it doesn't need to respond immediately.
The court had earlier established in a pretrial order that the patients needed to wait until Nov. 19 when the defendant fact sheets are due before making such requests, Ethicon said.
Almost 850 of the requests seek information that will be provided on those fact sheets and several push for the identities of experts that Ethicon doesn't need to disclose until January, the company said.
Ethicon said that if the patients need the information earlier because it's necessary to conduct depositions, they should've scheduled the depositions later.
Last year, J&J won the first bellwether case against it in a five-day trial that ended when Judge Goodwin granted the its motion for judgment, a ruling that was upheld by the Fourth Circuit in March.
Neither party could be reached for comment Tuesday.
Counsel information for the plaintiffs in the transferred cases was not available Tuesday.
The plaintiffs already involved in the MDL are represented by Henry G. Garrad III of Blasingame Burch Garrard & Ashley PC and Bryan F. Aylstock and Renee Baggett of Aylstock Witkin Kreis & Overholtz PLLC.
Ethicon and J&J are represented by David B. Thomas of Thomas Combs & Spann PLLC and Christy D. Jones of Butler Snow PLLC.
The case is In re: Ethicon Inc. Pelvic Repair System Products Liability Litigation, case number 2:12-md-02327, in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia. -
Sponsored by Sprint Delaware Judge Slashes $100M Boston Scientific Mesh Verdict to $10M
Oct 13, 2015 | Insurance Journal
By Jessica Dye
A Delaware judge on Oct. 9 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.
-
Texas Woman Files Lawsuit Over Vaginal Mesh Complications
Oct 13, 2015 | Top Class Actions
By Ashley Vanover
A Texas woman has added her Vaginal mesh lawsuit to the ongoing litigation against Ethicon and Johnson & Johnson, alleging that the medical device manufacturers fraudulently concealed the serious risks of their vaginal mesh devices.
According to the Vaginal Mesh MDL, Ethicon negligently manufactured and marketed defective and unreasonably dangerous devices, withholding information from consumers and the medical community about the risks of serious infection and injury of their transvaginal mesh products.
Plaintiff Hilda S. filed the vaginal mesh lawsuit in federal court, joining the pending vaginal mesh multidistrict litigation. Hilda claims that the Prosima transvaginal mesh device — which she had surgically implanted in June 2010 — was negligently designed, thereby causing serious side effects, such as mesh pain, mesh erosion, organ damage, and other vaginal mesh complications. Vaginal Mesh Risks
Many thousands of female patients have undergone procedures involving the implantation of transvaginal mesh as a means to treat urinary incontinence or address pelvic organ prolapse (POP), conditions that often develop as a result of childbirth.
Transvaginal mesh surgery is supposed to strengthen the internal organs and prevent them from coming into contact with each other by implanting the mesh device.
Unfortunately, recent years have seen alarming reports of serious complications from such treatments, with health regulators warning that one in ten women will suffer pelvic mesh problems.
The volume of incidents became so substantial that the FDA issued a public safety notice in late 2008 about vaginal mesh devices; in 2011, the agency warned that complications from transvaginal mesh products are not rare, and that alternative treatments may be preferable.
Additionally, the FDA issued a requirement in 2012 mandating manufacturers of the products to conduct new clinical trials to assess the risk of serious complications.
The following are among the vaginal mesh complications reported by women who underwent pelvic organ prolapse repair surgery with a transvaginal mesh:Mesh erosion; Infection; Bleeding; Pain during sex; Urinary problems; Discomfort; Vaginal scarring; Bowel, bladder and blood vessel perforation.
Vaginal Mesh Litigation
Many women, like Hilda, who experienced vaginal mesh complications are forced to undergo multiple revision surgeries to attempt to manage symptoms. These same women have since filed vaginal mesh lawsuits against the device manufacturers.
These vaginal mesh manufacturers face tens of thousands of federal lawsuits consolidated in multidistrict litigation (MDL) in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia under Chief Judge Joseph R. Goodwin. Additionally, thousands more are pending in state courts.
Currently, there are more than 60,000 federal vaginal mesh lawsuits against seven mesh manufacturers filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia under Chief Judge Joseph R. Goodwin.
The Vaginal Mesh Lawsuit is Case No. 2:15-cv-11392, in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia, Charleston Division and the Ethicon Transvaginal Mesh MDL is In re: Ethicon, Inc., Pelvic Repair System Products Liability Litigation, MDL No. 2327, in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia.
Client Attorney Privileged/Attorney Work Product/At Request of Counsel
Full Text of Stories Below
Add recipients
Suggested