Preview Newsletter
Ethicon 4/5
-
Update on Pelvic Mesh Trials Naming Defendant J&J
Apr 4, 2016 | Mesh Medical Device News Desk
This week lawyers and representatives from mesh making companies are expected to gather in Charleston, WV for a status conference on pelvic mesh litigation, April 6 and 7th. Judge Joseph Goodwin, who is overseeing 90,000 defective product cases filed in his court, will oversee the status updates. -
N.J. Appellate Court Upholds $11.11 Million Prolift Transvaginal Mesh Verdict Against J&J, Ethicon
Apr 4, 2016 | Harris Martin Publishing
N.J. Appellate Court Upholds $11.11 Million Prolift Transvaginal Mesh Verdict Against J&J, Ethicon April 4, 2016 -
Welcome April Readers to Mesh News Desk
Apr 4, 2016 | Mesh Medical Device News Desk
By Jane Akre
Welcome to Mesh News Desk (MND), also known as Mesh Medical Device News Desk where we following the goings on of the largely unregulated medical device industry and its fallout on the public. -
Boston Scientific Testing Surgical Mesh For Fake Parts: FDA
Apr 5, 2016 | Law360
By Cara Salvatore
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration said Friday it is looking at allegations that Boston Scientific's urogynecologic surgical mesh could contain counterfeit materials and noted that the device maker has launched an investigation likely to take months. -
Boston Scientific accused of using counterfeit material in its vaginal mesh
Apr 4, 2016 | Fierce Medical Devices
By Varun Saxena
As if the hundreds of millions of dollars in paid out in damages to injured patients aren't enough, Boston Scientific's ($BSX) troubled vaginal mesh devices have been hit by allegations that they contain a counterfeit material. -
Court Has Personal Jurisdiction Over Maker of Transvaginal Mesh Device, Ill. Federal Judge Rules
Apr 4, 2016 | Harris Martin Publishing
An Illinois federal court has personal jurisdiction over the French manufacturer of a transvaginal mesh sling device because it purposefully availed itself of conducting business in Illinois by marketing the device in that state, a judge has ruled. -
Pelvic Floor Center serves as one-stop shop to treat common condition
Apr 4, 2016 | Charleston Gazette-Mail
By Lori Kersey
It’s a common condition in women, and one that only increases with age. About 30 percent of women will develop a condition called “pelvic floor prolapse” in their lifetimes. -
J&J Witness Tells Jury Fired Exec Pursued Her
Apr 4, 2016 | Law360
By Jeannie O'Sullivan
...During his time at Ethicon, his concerns derailed profits for a coronary artery bypass graft surgery device, a gel used to prevent post-surgery abdominal adhesions, surgical mesh and other products, according to testimony when the trial began March 15.
Client Attorney Privileged/Attorney Work Product/At Request of Counsel
Online Sources
-
Update on Pelvic Mesh Trials Naming Defendant J&J
Apr 4, 2016 | Mesh Medical Device News Desk
This week lawyers and representatives from mesh making companies are expected to gather in Charleston, WV for a status conference on pelvic mesh litigation, April 6 and 7th. Judge Joseph Goodwin, who is overseeing 90,000 defective product cases filed in his court, will oversee the status updates.
Making an appearance are representative attorneys and corporate reps from Sofradim, Bard, Boston Scientific, Ethicon, AMS, Coloplast and Cook.
As he has before, Judge Goodwin is asking defendant client representatives with “full authority to make all decisions related to MDL 2327″
(Ethicon) be present along with in-house counsel for defendant and settlement counsel for the defendant and lead plaintiff counsel.Judge Goodwin wants to be assured the companies are hearing directly from the court and not receiving an inaccurate or rosy picture painted by defendant law firms who stand to benefit from protracted litigation or may be in conflict with the concept of moving things through the court.
Rabiola Trial – Rescheduled After Death of Plaintiff
The Josephine Marie Rabiola v. Ethicon, trial was to be heard in Austin, Texas in the 53rd Judicial District Court in Austin, Texas. It was originally set for October, then February of 2016. Ms. Rabiola has since passed away, reportedly from heart-related problems unrelated to mesh. She was 63-years-old when she was implanted with two meshes- the Gynecare TVT Secur system to treat incontinence in May of 2010, and then the Prosima Pelvic Floor Repair System to treat pelvic organ prolapse in November 2011.
Her lawyer son, who is the executor of her estate, will continue with her product liability trial when it is rescheduled.
This was to be the first trial for the TVT-Secur, a mini-sling that mimics the TVT-Obturator placement, that is through the obturator space, the leg socket. The TVT-Secur was intended to be the third generation improvement over the TVT (transvaginal tape).
The Abbrevo, a similar product and also a mini-sling, was the mesh implanted in Plaintiff Coleen Perry. She was awarded $5.7 million by a California jury in March 2015.
Mullins et al – 37 Plaintiffs’ Case to be Heard en Masse
The Mullins case has not been rescheduled at this time.
In the Mullins et al v. Ethicon case, (2:12-cv-02952) was continued as of March 15. See background story here and here.
This is a trial of 37 plaintiffs which may be heard all at one time before Judge Goodwin in Charleston, WV. All of the women in Mullins had been implanted with Johnson & Johnson’s TVT (transvaginal tape) and all are from West Virginia. Even though they had been implanted by different doctors, their injuries from defendant, Ethicon/ J&J pelvic mesh, offered enough similarities to consolidate them into one defective product case before Judge Goodwin in this multidistrict litigation.
This consolidated case will focus on design defect. Defective warning, breach of warranty and punitive damages may be added to plaintiffs’ claims.
Dr. Stanley Zaslau, M.D. from Morgantown, WV (here) is the doctor who implanted many of the plaintiffs. He has been noticed for videotaped deposition. Defendants objected to some of the requests – documents were already produced, while requests for brochures, training materials, video and emails are overly broad and ”not proportional to the needs of the case.”
Plaintiffs seek any evidence of a financial relationship between J&J / Ethicon and the doctor including consulting agreements, contracts, and monetary benefits. Defendants say this is overly broad and not relevant to any party’s claim. Christy Jones and David Thomas write the objection.
The completion of pretrial in Mullins should be done by June 30, 2016 and trial can be set after that time, according to Judge Goodwin’s order of March 15.
PTO_#213 on the Status hearing, April 6 and 7 2016 all mesh makers
PTO # 214 lays out the parameters for the defense to conduct the medical examinations of the women in Mullins.
Ramirez v. Ethicon, April 25, 2016 San Antonio, Texas
The Jennifer Ramirez v. Ethicon case was supposed to start July 13 in San Antonio, Texas before Judge J. David Canales, (No. #2012-ci-18690), 73rd Civil Division, TX. She was implanted with TVT-O and was originally supposed to go to trial November 2014.
Oral arguments are now set to begin Wednesday, April 27 and 28, 2016.
Brenda Trotter v. Ethicon- Pretrial in Oklahoma City. April, 2016.
Ms. Trotter was implanted with a TVT-S and a Prolift pelvic floor repair mesh. Interesting fact- she was implanted one month before the FDA finally discovered Prolift had been on the market withoutany FDA clearance. J&J just began selling Prolift in 2005 under the FDA clearance process and it wasn’t discovered until 2008 when J&J applied to the FDA to sell the next generation, the Prolift+M. The pretrial proceedings in April will determine a court date to be held later in this year or next year.
J&J Annual Shareholders meeting, New Brunswick, NJ, April 28, 2016.
Some women and family members injured by Johnson & Johnson’s pelvic mesh may plan to attend the annual shareholders meeting in New Brunswick, New Jersey. Two years ago, a rally was held outside the hotel and J&J headquarters as shareholders filed in.Two women implanted and injured by J&J’s pelvic mesh were allowed in to speak directly to J&J CEO Alex Gorsky.
See Investor FAQ here.
2016 Annual Meeting of Shareholders here.
Figeroa v Boston Scientific, May 16, 2016, Dallas Texas DC-13-03145, before Judge Molberg. Reportedly this case will be resolved with others naming defendant company Boston Scientific. It will serve as a vehicle to settle other cases, according to sources.
Edwards, et al. v. Ethicon, Inc., et al., June 3, 2016, 2:12-cv-09972, Charleston, WV
The plaintiffs Tonya Edwards, a resident of Georgia, She was implanted with a TVT-O by Dr. Harold Wittcoff at Piedmont Healthcare in Atlanta, GA. See background story here.Defense planned to raise the following defenses – Edwards was obese, had experienced hip and back pain prior to her mesh implant and had a small rectocele and cystocele as well as urethral hypermobility, all prior to her implant. Treatments such as injections had not treated her SUI. She had had about 60 occasions to consult with various medical providers and did not report pelvic pain until more than six years after her implant, says the defense. It was only after seeing a television ad for pelvic mesh litigation that she filed her case, according to lawyers for J&J.
Counts include Negligence, Strict Liability-Manufacturing Defect; Failure to Warn; Defective Product; Design defect; Fraud and fraudulent concealment, Negligence, Breach of express warranty, violation of consumer protection laws, gross negligence, unjust enrichment, loss of consortium and punitive damages.
Attorneys are Mark Mueller, John Fabry, Breanne Vandermeer. The case was filed December 31, 2012. This trial is limited to six days writes Judge Goodwin in a June 12, 2015 order.
There will be a pretrial conference Thursday, May 26 to determine if jury selection alone will take place on the 3rd or whether opening arguments will commence on that date, a Friday, or on the following Monday, June 6.
J&J TRIALS STILL AHEAD
Vanderveer v. Ethicon, Philadelphia, Kline & Specter, Prolift and TVT, February 8, 2016, Trial date certain October 24, 2016. Unassigned judge
Hansen, Bernice et al v Ethicon October 11, 2016, Trial date certain. Rep. by Kline and Specter, Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas
Beltz, Sharon v. Ethicon, Dec 5, 2016, Philadelphia, Kline & Specter
Prochazka, Traci v. Ethicon Jan 23, 2017, Kline & specter, Philadelphia Court of Common pleas
Dempsey, Theresa v Ethicon Feb 6, 2017, Philadelphia, Kline Specter
Following the Philadelphia Court here.
-
N.J. Appellate Court Upholds $11.11 Million Prolift Transvaginal Mesh Verdict Against J&J, Ethicon
Apr 4, 2016 | Harris Martin Publishing
N.J. Appellate Court Upholds $11.11 Million Prolift Transvaginal Mesh Verdict Against J&J, EthiconApril 4, 2016
CAMDEN, N.J. — A New Jersey appellate court has upheld a verdict of $11.11 million against Johnson & Johnson and its subsidiary Ethicon Inc. in a Prolift transvaginal mesh action, holding that the evidence supported the jury’s findings.
On April 1, the New Jersey Superior Court, Appellate Division, referred to evidence that the manufacturers failed to adequately warn plaintiff Linda Gross's implanting surgeon of the risks associated with the pelvic mesh and that the device was the proximate cause of injury.
Gross, a South Dakota nurse, alleged that she sustained various injuries after her surgeon implanted a Gynecare Prolift ...
Associated Law Firms
Butler Snow O'Mara Stevens & Cannada
Mazie Slater Katz & Freeman
Riker Danzig Hyland & PerrettiAssociated Documents
OpinionFor full story: http://harrismartin.com/article/20597/nj-appellate-court-upholds-1111-million-prolift-transvaginal-mesh-verdict-against-jj-ethicon/
-
Welcome April Readers to Mesh News Desk
Apr 4, 2016 | Mesh Medical Device News Desk
By Jane Akre
Welcome to Mesh News Desk (MND), also known as Mesh Medical Device News Desk where we following the goings on of the largely unregulated medical device industry and its fallout on the public.
If you are new to the mesh mess you have come to the right place.
There are about 100,000 lawsuits currently filed in the U.S. to address the injuries that come from pelvic mesh. More are filed every day, not just in the U.S. but globally. Despite the product liability litigation, mesh is still used every day. Women are told “It’s different mesh.” It isn’t.
See the story “Top 10 Myths Women are Told Today about Pelvic Mesh” here
Most mesh for pelvic and hernia is made of polypropylene, a polymer from the petroleum industry, is small pore and subject to shrinkage and, in some, inciting a systemic reaction. This in combination to the mechanics of a hard polymer permanently implanted in a soft, nerve-rich pelvic area during a blind procedure, often by under-trained professionals, and there is a huge potential for complications.
Hernia mesh is also made of the same polypropylene and anecdotal reports, as well as those gathered by scientists who deal with complications, show they too are having complications after their implant.
Then again, some folks do fine, least in the short run. At the present time, there is no way of telling which you are – there are no tests and no attempt to identify who will have an “adverse event” as it called.
If you assume the U.S. Food and Drug Administration is watching over you in terms of medical devices, please be aware, the agency relies on the integrity of the industries it regulates to be vigilant and assure safety and efficacy when it comes to clearing the majority of medical devices for market. What we are observing from the defective product trials over pelvic mesh, many of which have been found defective but remain on the market, this is in desperate need of a major shift in thinking. Companies have been shown to clearly put profits ahead of patients.
There is a reason juries have listened to the stories of cover-ups, missteps, and outright fraud and awarded millions in punitive damages to mesh injured patients.
The FDA has issued two reports about pelvic mesh, the first, in 2008, after thousands of reports of complications came into the agency, said pelvic mesh complications were “rare.” By mid-2011 the FDA reversed that stance and said complications were “not rare.”
Listen to Project Censored interview your editor recently. They asked very good questions. Listen here. The FDA White Paper on mesh from July 2011 is here.
If you are told you need polypropylene mesh to correct prolapse or incontinence, you will need to direct your own medical care and be a truly informed consumer. We hope these pages help you toward that goal. Unless and until one can predict who will react negatively, the Precautionary Principle is advised.
These pages will attest to that.If you are to be subjected to any medical device that has received FDA “clearance” (cleared not approved under the 510(k)) please be wary and ask questions.
Cleared for sale (510(k) ) is not the same things as premarket approval which requires reaching a higher bar of safety.
New Design
Mesh News Desk has a new design on the website. Adding advertiser, Sundown Marketing and David Moyers will help those of you new to the issues find an attorney.
Greg Vigna, MD and JD is dedicated to addressing mesh injuries and will help you create a life plan for your ongoing medical needs.
As always, MND is not a substitute for advice from your medical and legal professionals.
Onward Friends!
Jane Akre, Editor, Mesh News Desk
-
Boston Scientific Testing Surgical Mesh For Fake Parts: FDA
Apr 5, 2016 | Law360
By Cara Salvatore
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration said Friday it is looking at allegations that Boston Scientific's urogynecologic surgical mesh could contain counterfeit materials and noted that the device maker has launched an investigation likely to take months.
In an announcement on its website, the FDA said there are allegations the mesh “may contain counterfeit raw material.”
“Health care professionals and their patients should be aware of this investigation,” the FDA said, even though there is currently no reason to think that even potentially counterfeit mesh has resulted in worse health results for any patient and that Boston Scientific has done no wrong in possibly changing its sourcing for materials — a common step, the FDA said.
Still, the company will begin conducting tests that will probably take months to complete.
"The additional testing should be sufficient for the FDA to determine whether or not the urogynecologic surgical mesh manufactured from the alleged counterfeit raw material are equivalent to the urogynecologic surgical mesh manufactured from the original raw material supplier," the agency said.
Representatives for the FDA and Boston Scientific were not immediately available for comment.
Surgical mesh is used to provide additional support when weakened or damaged tissue is being repaired, the FDA said.
In March, a West Virginia federal judge overseeing multidistrict litigation against Boston Scientific over its pelvic mesh products denied a request to transfer 351 cases being handled by Kline & Specter PC back to Pennsylvania, their home district, saying it would defeat the purpose of multidistrict litigation. That litigation isn't based on counterfeiting allegations; it alleges that the mesh has caused harm to patients.
U.S. District Judge Joseph Goodwin — the father of the district's U.S. attorney, Booth Goodwin — said that pretrial motion practice and discovery are ongoing, so remand would be counterproductive. Boston Scientific also argued that only the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation, not the court, has the authority to transfer cases that originated through the panel.
Tens of thousands of cases involving mesh products manufactured by Boston Scientific, Johnson & Johnson and C.R. Bard Inc. have been consolidated in an MDL in Judge Goodwin's court.
According to court documents, Kline & Specter filed 90 cases on behalf of plaintiffs in Pennsylvania’s Eastern District that were later transferred to the MDL, and filed 261 more directly within the consolidated litigation.
The firm has said that “generic discovery is substantially completed,” that the cases are not set to go to trial in the MDL, and that there is a large backlog of cases causing a delay. Kline & Specter attorneys also said that Boston Scientific has not offered to resolve the group of suits.
And in February, a Missouri state jury found Boston Scientific and C.R. Bard not liable in a woman's $28 million suit alleging the companies' pelvic mesh implants rendered her incontinent and caused her pain.
The two-month trial centered on Boston Scientific's Solyx device and Bard's Align device. Plaintiff Eve Sherrer claimed that the devices were defective and caused a litany of problems for her, including pain, difficulty walking and a "nonfunctional vagina."
Sherrer's attorneys told jurors during the trial that the Marlex-brand mesh in both devices wasn't medical grade, and that the devices caused pain and were prone to fail and shift inside the body. The mesh was not designed or intended for permanent implantation, they said.
--Additional reporting by Brandon Lowrey and Alex Wolf. Editing by Jill Coffey. -
Boston Scientific accused of using counterfeit material in its vaginal mesh
Apr 4, 2016 | Fierce Medical Devices
By Varun Saxena
As if the hundreds of millions of dollars in paid out in damages to injured patients aren't enough, Boston Scientific's ($BSX) troubled vaginal mesh devices have been hit by allegations that they contain a counterfeit material. Boston Sci denies the charge, and says it has a robust quality control system. The FDA said the company is conducting tests on the material to determine if it impacts the safety and efficacy of the mesh.
-
Court Has Personal Jurisdiction Over Maker of Transvaginal Mesh Device, Ill. Federal Judge Rules
Apr 4, 2016 | Harris Martin Publishing
An Illinois federal court has personal jurisdiction over the French manufacturer of a transvaginal mesh sling device because it purposefully availed itself of conducting business in Illinois by marketing the device in that state, a judge has ruled.
On March 29, Judge James Shadid of the U.S. District Court for the Central District of Illinois concluded that the manufacturer had sufficient minimum contacts with, and directed its business toward, the Illinois market.
In May 2012, Illinois resident Alberta Gerk underwent surgery for stress urinary incontinence during which her doctor implanted an I-STOP transvaginal mesh sling device. The ...
Associated Law Firms
Levin Simes
Meyers & Flowers
Ulmer & BerneAssociated Documents
OrderFor full story: http://harrismartin.com/article/20596/court-has-personal-jurisdiction-over-maker-of-transvaginal-mesh-device-ill-federal-judge-rules/
-
Pelvic Floor Center serves as one-stop shop to treat common condition
Apr 4, 2016 | Charleston Gazette-Mail
By Lori Kersey
It’s a common condition in women, and one that only increases with age. About 30 percent of women will develop a condition called “pelvic floor prolapse” in their lifetimes.
The pelvic floor is a group of muscles that hold the uterus, bladder, bowel and other pelvic organs in place. Pelvic floor prolapse can mean any of the pelvic organs falling down when they otherwise shouldn’t.
“Prolapse is any kind of weakness or bulging of the vaginal tissue. [It’s] basically any kind of weakness in the pelvic floor that results in the falling of organs in the vaginal fault,” said Dr. Josh Lohri, director of the Pelvic Floor Center at Charleston Area Medical Center’s Urology Department.
As women age, the muscles and ligaments that make up the pelvic floor weaken. Vaginal births, pelvic surgeries like hysterectomies and gaining weight also increase a woman’s chances of prolapse.
Of the women who develop the condition, about 10 percent will have surgery to correct it, Lohri said. Many of them will have multiple surgeries.
“You fix one compartment and another compartment basically gets compromised as a result of that so ... somebody may present with bladder prolapse and they fix that and several years down the road as the vagina has kind of compensated, you get weakness,” he said.
Vaginal pressure is the most common symptom of the condition, Lohri said.
“They use the comment it feels like they have a, whatever it may be, a watermelon, a cantaloupe, a softball, something between their legs that otherwise shouldn’t be there,” he said.
Other symptoms include trouble passing urine, constipation and discomfort during sex. Some women also notice blood.
“They present with vaginal bleeding or bleeding somewhere and you evaluate them and everything is hanging out,” he said. The women often don’t realize it, he said.
Lohri recommends kegel exercises, which consist of contracting and relaxing the muscles that make up the pelvic floor.
“We have a pelvic floor physical therapist that we work with fairly regularly in women that have mild prolapse or those that are not looking for a surgical fit right off,” he said.
If left uncorrected, the worst cases of pelvic floor prolapse can cause infections and even kidney failure, recurrent urinary tract infections and vaginal ulcerations.
“These are things that we would be much more inclined to proceed surgically or at least some sort of correction,” Lohri said.
There are surgeries to correct the condition. They include using a patient’s own tissue to resupport the floor of the pelvis and using surgical mesh.
The use of transvaginal pelvic mesh has been controversial.
U.S. District Court Judge Joseph Goodwin in Charleston oversaw more than 50,000 cases over the implantation of vaginal mesh as part of federal litigation across the country.
Women claim the mesh produced by multiple companies degrades and shrinks, requiring replacement and causing other medical problems.
“The theory is if you use mesh, which is a permanent fixture, then it’s a more longterm durable repair,” he said. “Obviously there’s some complications with that.”
Lohri said he recommends women be mindful of the symptoms and don’t be afraid to get a procedure done to fix it.
“Most of all these surgical procedures are done on an out-patient basis with a less than 24-hour stay, so there’s not a five-, six-hour operation,” he said. “It’s not a weeklong hospital stay. It’s pretty minimally invasive stuff that can be done with good long-term results.”
Besides surgery, a doctor may recommend pelvic floor physical therapy as a treatment.
CAMC’s Pelvic Floor Center opened two years ago and gives patients a sort of one-stop shop for dealing with the condition. Lohri said there was a huge demand for the kind of services offered at the center, which are common at bigger university settings.
“We’ve got our own on-site urodynamic suite,” Lohri said. “We work with some of the colorectal surgeons and work with the pelvic floor physical therapists to kind of have everything at least, if not everyone, here at the same office at the same time, at least a multidisciplinary approach. At least we can have all the sources readily available.”
-
J&J Witness Tells Jury Fired Exec Pursued Her
Apr 4, 2016 | Law360
By Jeannie O'Sullivan
Two different pictures of the relationship between a fired Johnson & Johnson executive who is suing the company for wrongful termination and the younger woman he mentored in the office emerged when the woman took the stand in a New Jersey courtroom Monday.
At the end of the day's testimony in Middlesex County Superior Court, the jury was left to ponder whether Yasemin Dalgali was manipulated by the power of plaintiff Joel S. Lippman, the onetime worldwide medical affairs officer of J&J's medical device maker Ethicon, or if Dalgali actually used flirty emails to start what both have admitted was a consensual, if never consummated, relationship.
Lippman — a doctor who alleges the New Brunswick-based pharmaceutical giant fired him for raising concerns about dangerous products, not for his inappropriate relationship as the company claims — regularly told her she was beautiful, intelligent, sexy and mesmerizing when she came to work in his department, Dalgali said on the stand.
A native of Turkey who emigrated to the United States in 1998, Dalgali during her sometimes tearful testimony described herself as “ambitious” and “very inspired” to become a CEO one day. She began working for Ethicon in 2000 and in 2004 was transferred to Lippman's department, Medical Affairs, although she didn't report directly to him.
Dalgali said she worked in the Reimbursement & Healthcare Economics section and later held a “knowledge management” position created for her by Lippman. His compliments, which came at times in the form of cards and notes left in her desk, made her feel “recognized,” she testified.
“I kind of liked it, because somebody was thinking about me,” Dalgali, now 39, said.
Notes and expressions progressed to physical affection. Dalgali recalled a business trip both attended in Athens, Greece where the two ended up in her hotel room after dinner. She put on music, the two drank alcohol, and fell on the bed, kissing and touching, she affirmed under questioning.
Things were less friendly during business trip to Amsterdam, where Lippman began complimenting her during dinner and changed his tune when Dalgali brought up the fact that he was married, she testified. Dalgali claims Lippman then said, “I could destroy you.”
“I think he really meant it. I felt that he meant that,” said Dalgali said of the remark, which Lippman denied making when testifying earlier in the trial.
The next night when she confronted him, she said, he told her she was imagining it. Asked by Ethicon attorney Jane A. Rigby why she went to dinner with him again after his remark, Dalgali said that she was trying to “manage” the situation herself to preserve her job.
“But apparently I was so stupid and young I couldn't manage it,” Dalgali said.
Yet emails Dalgali sent to Lippman before and even after his alleged "destroy" remark apparently depict her wooing him.
“You are very important/special. You know that, right?” she wrote to him in May 2004.
Another email from Dalgali to Lippman included the words “I love you” in her native Turkish and yet another invited him to Barnes & Noble for a late afternoon latte and to talk about “the puzzle of our lives.”
“You were trying to build a personal relationship, weren't you?” attorney Bruce P. McMoran, representing Lippman, said during cross-examination. Dalgali responded that they already had a personal relationship.
The emails continued after the Amsterdam trip in which Lippman allegedly told her he could destroy her. “This is magical,” she said in a December 2004 email chain in which she also noted “the sensation never leaves.”
The relationship ended in the fall of 2005, when Lippman told her his wife found out about it, according to testimony. Afterward, Dalgali said, her projects were taken away from her.
Lippman wasn't the only male employee who was interested in Dalgali. A human resources executive who testified in March said that he learned of Dalgali's relationships with both Lippman and Noel Rolon, Ethicon’s former director of clinical operations, while investigating Rolon's complaint that Lippman had given him an unfair performance review.
Rolon had once professed his love for Dalgali in an email, but she rebuffed the romantic advance and the two maintained a platonic relationship, according to Dalgali's testimony Monday. Dalgali admitted Rolon lent her money for an apartment security deposit and that she hasn't paid it all back, and that he'd sent her flowers when she became a United States citizen.
The pair also attended a two-day business meeting in Turkey that stretched into a weeklong trip, during which they generated more than $7,000 in expenses and visited with family and friends, according to her testimony.
In a deposition that was read aloud in court last week, Rolon said be began fearing for his job when he found out about the relationship between Lippman and Dalgali. Lippman gave him an "angry look" when Rolon spotted them together on an exercise trail on the workplace grounds in June 2005, according to his deposition.
Dalgali and Rolon later worked together at the same company after both of their positions were eliminated in 2006, the same year Lippman was fired, Dalgali testified. She denied that Rolon arranged the interviews she got at other places where he has worked since the two left Ethicon.
Dalgali was on disability for her final months at Ethicon, according to her testimony Monday, but the reason wasn't stated in court.
Dalgali ended up filing a sexual harassment lawsuit against Ethicon in 2006, she stated under oath while the jury was on recess. The suit was later settled for undisclosed terms, according to testimony.
Judge Vincent Leblon granted Lippman's attorneys' request to exclude lawsuit from testimony when they argued that the instant case isn't about sexual harassment and Dalgali never made a sexual harassment claim to human resources. Rigby argued it was relevant considering Lippman has claimed he never harassed her.
Testimony is expected to resume Tuesday.
Lippman joined Ethicon in 2000 after a decade as an executive at J&J's subsidiary Ortho-McNeil Pharmaceutical. During his time at Ethicon, his concerns derailed profits for a coronary artery bypass graft surgery device, a gel used to prevent post-surgery abdominal adhesions, surgical mesh and other products, according to testimony when the trial began March 15. After refusing an offer to resign, he was fired in May 2006— six months after a recall that cost the company $40 million.
Lippman's concerns pitted him against executives under tremendous pressure to put new products on the market and revealed a "widespread" corporate culture that put profits before safety, his lawyers have said. He claims the firing cost him $9.6 million in economic losses.
Ethicon Inc. and J&J had won summary dismissal of the lawsuit at the trial court level but saw that decision overturned by the state's Appellate Division in September 2013.
The New Jersey Supreme Court agreed to take up the case and ruled in July that so-called watchdog employees are covered under the state's whistleblower law.
Lippman is represented by Bruce P. McMoran, Michael O'Connor and Justin D. Burns of McMoran O'Connor & Bramley PC.
Ethicon and J&J are represented by Francis X. Dee, Jane A. Rigby and Stephen F. Payerle ofMcElroy Deutsch Mulvaney & Carpenter LLP.
The case is Lippman v. Ethicon Inc. et al., case number unavailable, in the Superior Court of New Jersey in Mercer County.
Client Attorney Privileged/Attorney Work Product/At Request of Counsel
Online Sources
Add recipients
Suggested