Preview Newsletter
Pinnacle 12/8/16
-
J&J questions fairness of hip implant trial, $1 billion verdict
Dec 7, 2016 | Reuters
By Erica Teichert
Johnson & Johnson (JNJ.N) will challenge the fairness of a trial that produced a verdict of $1 billion in damages against the company last week over allegations of design flaws in its Pinnacle hip implant. Although legal experts think J&J faces an uphill battle, both they and investors believe the Texas jury's penalty, the largest product liability verdict so far this year, is unlikely to stand. -
Third verdict issued in Johnson & Johnson, DePuy cases
Dec 9, 2016 | Southeast Texas Record
By S. Laney Griffo
Another verdict has been handed down in one of the cases against Johnson & Johnson and its subsidiary DePuy Orthopaedics Inc. A Dallas federal jury returned a verdict of more than $1 billion in the combined cases of Marvin Andrews, Rosa Metzler, Michael Weiser, Judith Rodriguez, Lisa Standerfer and Kathleen Davis ,who each filed cases individually against the companies, alleging failure in their metal-on-metal hip replacements. -
The One-Billion-Dollar Verdict
Dec 8, 2016 | Drug & Device Law Blog
By John Sullivan
Well that was something. When we left you last Thursday, the jury for the third bellwether trial in the Pinnacle Hip Implant MDL had just started its deliberations, and we once again expressed concern over the trial’s evidentiary and procedural rulings and the effect they might have on the verdict. Our concern-level was high. Last time, amidst similar concerns, the jury came back with a half-billion dollar verdict. -
$1 Billion Jury Award in 3rd Pinnacle Trial
Dec 7, 2016 | Orthopedics This Week
By Walter Eisner
A federal jury in Texas awarded $40 million in compensatory damages to six people implanted with DePuy Orthopaedics Inc.'s Pinnacle metal-on-metal hip implant in December 1, 2016. Then the jury awarded more than $1 billion in punitive damages. The staggering punitive award is sobering for J&J (Johnson & Johnson), DePuy's parent company, considering there are still another 8,500 plaintiffs in multidistrict litigation being handled by the same Dallas federal court. The jurors' verdict came after less than a day of deliberations. The trial began on October. 3. -
Johnson & Johnson Must Pay $1 Billion Over Faulty Hip Implants
Dec 7, 2016 | Natural Society
By Julie Fidler
Johnson & Johnson (J&J) and its subsidiary DePuy has been ordered by a federal jury in Dallas to pay more than $1 billion to settle allegations that the company hid flaws in its Pinnacle hip implants that had to be surgically removed. [1] -
J&J Looking to Rebound From Series of Megaverdicts
Dec 7, 2016 | The Legal Intelligencer
By Amanda Bronstad
After Johnson & Johnson got hit with a $1 billion verdict last week, plaintiffs lawyers were quick to paint a portrait of the company as an aggressive litigator uninterested in settling whose actions have prompted juries to award gargantuan punitive damages. It's the same refrain that plaintiffs attorneys have been touting this year as Johnson & Johnson has gotten hammered with five big verdicts over its hip implants and talcum powder products. -
Q&A: Lanier on Billion-Dollar Verdicts and the Trump Effect
Dec 6, 2016 | Texas Lawyer
By Scott Flaherty
Winning a $1 billion jury verdict against a major company would be the pinnacle of most lawyers' careers. W. Mark Lanier of The Lanier Law Firm in Houston—whose biggest trial win clocked in at a whopping $9 billion—isn't most lawyers. -
Johnson & Johnson hit with over $1 billion verdict on hip implants
Dec 8, 2016 | The Villages Sun Times
By Max Garcia
A Texas jury has ordered the corporation to pay over $1 billion to patients who alleged that J&J did not fully disclose information on its Pinnacle artificial hips. -
Jurors award more than $1B in hip implant case
Dec 8, 2016 | Vivere Milano
It was alleged that DePuy and parent company Johnson & Johnson knew about these risks, but continued to market the Pinnacle Ultamet hip implant nonetheless. The computer navigation and imaging system enables the medical team to determine an exact surgical site and angle at which hip implants should be placed, minimizing the incision and encouraging quick recovery. In some cases, the cobalt-and-chromium material caused an infection that forced the patient to have the artificial hips surgically removed. -
J&J hit with more than $1bn verdict over defective hip implants
Dec 8, 2016 | Equilibrio Informativo
By Valasco Ojeda
A federal jury in Dallas on Thursday ordered Johnson & Johnson and its DePuy Orthopaedics unit to pay more than $1 billion to six plaintiffs who said they were injured by Pinnacle hip implants. The $1.041 billion verdict was comprised of $32 million in compensatory damage, and the remainder of the award was in punitive damages. -
Johnson & Johnson ordered to pay $1 billion settlement
Dec 8, 2016 | Solo News
By Domezio Lambertini
The six plaintiffs were implanted with the hip devices and experienced tissue death, bone erosion and other injuries they attributed to design flaws. More than 8,500 plaintiffs have sued Johnson & Johnson in the Pinnacle implant cases. The awarded totaled $1,041,311,648.17 and includes $28,311,648.17 total in personal injury damages for the six plaintiffs; $4 million in loss of consortium damages. The rest were punitive damages. J&J have denied liability in these cases and according to Fortune.com, will appeal the decision to the Appeals Court. -
J&J slammed with $1B verdict over metal-on-metal hip implants
Dec 8, 2016 | Senegal Actu
By Mercedes Poole
J&J stopped selling the devices in 2013 after the U.S. Food and Drug Administration toughened artificial-hip regulations. The rest were punitive damages. "These are the largest punitive damages assessed on a company in the United States this year, and hopefully it will send a clear message to pharmaceutical companies out there that if you put profit above safety, there will be accountability and penalties", he continued. The third Pinnacle hip implant trial finished closing statements earlier this week and the jury quickly returned a verdict.
National Coverage
Trade Coverage
Local Coverage
International Coverage
Full Text of Stories Below
International Coverage
-
J&J questions fairness of hip implant trial, $1 billion verdict
Dec 7, 2016 | Reuters
By Erica Teichert
Johnson & Johnson (JNJ.N) will challenge the fairness of a trial that produced a verdict of $1 billion in damages against the company last week over allegations of design flaws in its Pinnacle hip implant.
Although legal experts think J&J faces an uphill battle, both they and investors believe the Texas jury's penalty, the largest product liability verdict so far this year, is unlikely to stand.
In the two-month trial, five separate people from California argued that design flaws in the metal-on-metal implant made by J&J subsidiary DePuy Orthopaedics caused tissue death, bone erosion and other injuries.
It is the second large verdict against J&J in the Pinnacle implant litigation, which has been consolidated before U.S. District Court Judge Edward Kinkeade in Texas. In July, another jury awarded six Texas plaintiffs $500 million. Both cases were so-called bellwethers, intended to gauge the value of claims for more than 9,000 other pending implant cases.
J&J said in a statement it was confident in its appeal prospects and would not settle. It also said it stood by the safety of its product.
Last Thursday's verdict has had little impact on J&J stock. Les Funtleyder, a portfolio manager with ESquared Asset Management, said investors assume large health products companies will occasionally be sued and lose and that the costs are ultimately manageable.
J&J said it will ask Kinkeade to reduce or throw out the jury award before appealing to the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in New Orleans. According to the company, the multi-plaintiff format stacked the deck against it by parading a series of victims in front of the jury and exaggerating the number of complaints about the implant.
The company won the first bellwether trial in a case involving a single plaintiff in 2014. The next is scheduled for September 2017, and Kinkeade has not decided how many plaintiffs will be involved in that trial.
These results "perfectly illustrate the distortions and confusion inherent in multi-plaintiff trials and underscore the extent of the legal errors that have been repeated," said J&J defense lawyer John Beisner.
But several legal experts said such a challenge faced long odds. Lynn Baker, a professor at the University of Texas School of Law, noted trial judges are normally given great leeway in managing their cases and multi-plaintiff trials were a long-established means of clearing dockets faster.
"I would not expect J&J to succeed on a claim that they were prejudiced by the multi-plaintiff bellwether format," she said.
J&J also said the judge allowed plaintiffs' lawyers to present inflammatory and prejudicial testimony to the juries, raising bribery accusations against the company and claims that the metal-on-metal implants could cause cancer.
University of Richmond School of Law Professor Carl Tobias said an appeals court was unlikely to overturn the verdict on such grounds though. "Unless there is clear prejudice on the part of the jury, you’ve got to defer to the factfinder," he said.
But even without showing its trial was unfair, the professors said J&J's case was strong for having the $1 billion award reduced on the grounds that it is excessive.
Kinkeade cut the $500 million July verdict to $151 million.
Andrew Bradt, a professor at University of California Berkeley School of Law, noted the U.S. Supreme Court has held punitive damages should be no more than 10 times compensatory damages. The $1.041 billion award was mainly punitive, with just $32 million in compensatory damages.
Bradt said the final award could be even lower than $320 million, since the high court has also said punitive damages awards should be closely tied to plaintiffs' injuries rather than as a broader deterrent.
-
Third verdict issued in Johnson & Johnson, DePuy cases
Dec 9, 2016 | Southeast Texas Record
By S. Laney Griffo
Another verdict has been handed down in one of the cases against Johnson & Johnson and its subsidiary DePuy Orthopaedics Inc.
A Dallas federal jury returned a verdict of more than $1 billion in the combined cases of Marvin Andrews, Rosa Metzler, Michael Weiser, Judith Rodriguez, Lisa Standerfer and Kathleen Davis ,who each filed cases individually against the companies, alleging failure in their metal-on-metal hip replacements.
“Johnson & Johnson and DePuy sold well over 100,000 Pinnacle, metal-on-metal ,hip replacements,” lead attorney Mark Lanier told the Southeast Texas Record.
The companies experienced issues with their product and stopped selling them in 2013. Nearly 9,000 lawsuits have been filed regarding the product. Both companies decided they wouldn’t settle any of these cases, meaning all will be going to court.
“Their company is worth $72 billion,” Lanier said. “It’s not hard to sit on the money and delay. Why pay it today when they can wait two, three, four years and build interest on it.” Lanier added that some key attorneys inside and outside of Johnson & Johnson believed these cases were winnable.
The courts decided to try the matter as multi-district litigation cases and have several bellwether trials because of the large number of related cases. A bellwether trial is when there are a large number of related cases, and the courts will select several to try. This gives those involved the chance to see if the case will likely win or lose and how they will try the litigation.
This is the third bellwether case. Each case has been heard by Judge Ed Kinkeade in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas. The first trial, Herlihy-Paoli v. DePuy Orthopaedics, Inc. et al, was won by DePuy.
“In these cases, we argue there should be a safer alternative design, like metal-on-plastic,” Lanier said. “In this case the surgeon put the hip in wrong so it didn’t matter what it was made of.”
In the second trial, heard in March, the jury awarded $500 million to five individuals. The verdict for the most recent trial includes $30 million in actual damages for the plaintiffs and more than $1 billion in punitive damages.
There will be a fourth bellwether trial scheduled September 2017.
“After the next trial, we will ask that the judge remand these cases and send them back to their individual courts,” Lanier said.
Lanier is confident the plaintiffs will win this next trial and is happy with the message the jury is sending with these decisions.
“The jurors are telling the company they need to be responsible and take case of the customers using their products,” Lanier said. “This is the clearest message from a jury I’ve seen in a while.”
-
The One-Billion-Dollar Verdict
Dec 8, 2016 | Drug & Device Law Blog
By John Sullivan
Well that was something. When we left you last Thursday, the jury for the third bellwether trial in the Pinnacle Hip Implant MDL had just started its deliberations, and we once again expressed concern over the trial’s evidentiary and procedural rulings and the effect they might have on the verdict. Our concern-level was high. Last time, amidst similar concerns, the jury came back with a half-billion dollar verdict.
Apparently that was chump change. Everything is bigger in Texas. And this time it was over one billion. Let that sink in. Over one billion. That’s a massive amount of money. Has anyone even ever won that in a lottery? It’s 1,000 winners of Who Wants to Be A Millionaire. And then you have to add about 40 more winners because the actual verdict was about $1.04 billion.
It’s hard to believe that something didn’t go awry here—a second time. And, like the last time, we aren’t being Monday-morning quarterbacks. We saw the signs well in advance.
So what’s next? Well, this reality-shattering amount can’t stand. Over one-billion of it is punitive damages. That’s a heck of a multiplier. Somewhere along the line, either at the trial court or on appeal, it will be struck down. Maybe more important, the massive amount of the verdict has to scream to the Fifth Circuit: PROBLEMS!!! . . . Right?
The MDL court has scheduled another bellwether trial in September 2017. You can bet that the defendants will move to stay that trial pending rulings on appeals to the Fifth Circuit, including the appeal from the second bellwether trial and this one too.
The MDL Court denied the same motion before this trial, so you’d have to think it will likely do so again. Then there will be another writ of mandamus to the Fifth Circuit, something that was also denied before this last trial. Will it do so again? Oh boy, this is something.
-
$1 Billion Jury Award in 3rd Pinnacle Trial
Dec 7, 2016 | Orthopedics This Week
By Walter Eisner
A federal jury in Texas awarded $40 million in compensatory damages to six people implanted with DePuy Orthopaedics Inc.'s Pinnacle metal-on-metal hip implant in December 1, 2016.
Then the jury awarded more than $1 billion in punitive damages. The staggering punitive award is sobering for J&J (Johnson & Johnson), DePuy's parent company, considering there are still another 8,500 plaintiffs in multidistrict litigation being handled by the same Dallas federal court. The jurors' verdict came after less than a day of deliberations. The trial began on October. 3.
Plaintiffs 2, DePuy 1
The score is now 2-1 in favor of the plaintiffs.
This was the third bellwether trial of the multidistrict litigation representing patients who claim that the company failed to warn doctors and consumers about complications possible from the device, which included pain and subsequent removal surgeries. In 2014, the company won the first trial.
Then this past March, a jury awarded more than $500 million to five patients who had similar physical and medical complications allegedly caused by the implant. That award was cut by roughly 70% due to a Texas state law capping punitive damages in plaintiff cases.
According to the National Law Journal, punitive damages award from this third trial won't be subject to a cap because that case was tried under the laws of California, where those six plaintiffs were from.
A fourth bellwether trial, which will involve 10 patients, has been scheduled by U.S. District Judge Ed Kinkeade in Dallas for September 2017.
Call to Settle
"Once again, a jury has listened to the testimony of both sides, and returned a verdict affirming what we've known all along: a responsible company would settle these cases and take care of their injured consumers, rather than forcing them through expensive and vexatious litigation just to delay justice," said lead attorney Mark Lanier of the Lanier Law Firm in Houston. "This jury spoke loud and clear, and I hope J&J [Johnson & Johnson] will finally listen."
Appeal Promised
But lawyers for J&J said they would appeal. The company says its ability to defend against the claims was wrongly hindered by several rulings by Judge Kinkeade. The lawyers claim the rulings undermined their "ability to properly and fairly defend against the allegations," including the decision to try the cases of the six plaintiffs together. "During trial, the companies were forced to move for mistrial six times," they said in a prepared statement. "The companies have strong grounds for appeal and remain committed to the long-term defense of the allegations in these lawsuits."
A spokesperson for DePuy reportedly told Consumer Reports that the company was immediately appealing the decision. “DePuy acted appropriately and responsibly in the design and testing of ULTAMET Metal-on-Metal, and the product is backed by a strong track record of clinical data showing reduced pain and restored mobility for patients suffering from chronic hip pain.”
“The jury verdict is not a determination by a regulatory body, governmental agency, or other entity with oversight of the ULTAMET Metal-on-Metal Articulation, and it is also not a new scientific study or technical assessment of the safety of ULTAMET Metal-on-Metal. The product continues to perform well for many patients.”
Insults
Lanier, however, said J&J's chances of winning on appeal are, "next to none." He pointed out that Judge Kinkeade made numerous rulings against the plaintiffs, too, which prevented them from submitting evidence that he said would have cast J&J's general marketing practices in a bad light. He noted that J&J sought out Judge Kinkeade, an appointee of President George W. Bush and a conservative. He also noted the Dallas federal court "is hardly known for being plaintiff-friendly."
He said whoever at J&J is deciding against settling the Pinnacle case "is an idiot," because the entire Pinnacle case could have been settled for $1.5 billion. "Now, J&J is looking at that amount from just two trials."
The case is IN RE: DePuy Orthopaedics Inc., Pinnacle Hip Implant Products Liability Litigation, MDL 3:11-md-0244.
-
Johnson & Johnson Must Pay $1 Billion Over Faulty Hip Implants
Dec 7, 2016 | Natural Society
By Julie Fidler
Johnson & Johnson (J&J) and its subsidiary DePuy has been ordered by a federal jury in Dallas to pay more than $1 billion to settle allegations that the company hid flaws in its Pinnacle hip implants that had to be surgically removed. [1]
The jury concluded that DePuy, the maker of the artificial hips, knew the devices were defective, but failed to warn doctors and patients that the implants could fail. The verdict includes more than $30 million in actual damages for the 6 plaintiffs and more than $1 billion in punitive damages, court filings show. [2]
It is likely that the $1 billion award will be reduced. In July, the judge presiding over this case reduced a $500 million verdict in an earlier Pinnacle implant case to $151 million, citing a Texas law that limits punitive damages awards.
The 6 individuals involved in the case allege they suffered “serious medical complications caused by defective” metal-on-metal (MoM) Pinnacle implants. Each of the patients had to undergo revision surgery to replace the devices and repair tissue damage and bone erosion. At least 1 patient had received double implants. [1]
The lead attorney in the case said:
“Once again, a jury has listened to the testimony of both sides, and returned a verdict affirming what we’ve known all along: a responsible company would settle these cases and take care of their injured consumers, rather than forcing them through expensive and vexatious litigation just to delay justice.
This jury spoke loud and clear, and I hope J&J will finally listen.”Metal-On-Metal Hip Implants: A Timeline
Prior to 1976, the FDA had no control over medical devices. However, thanks to the Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, that changes, and the agency gains full authority over metal-on-metal hip implants. [3]
Since the devices were marketed prior to the passage of the act, MoM hips are classified as “high-risk” (Class III). Despite the classification – and despite concerns over potential metal ion toxicity even before 1976 – the FDA still allows medical device makers to employ the 510(k) “fast-track” regulatory process for the implants.
Over the years, many changes are made to the design of metal-on-metal hip implants. One of those major changes occurs in 2004, and is quickly approved using the FDA’s 510(k) expedited approval system. Studies later reveal that this design change contributed to high rates of failure, metal ion debris, and increased wear.
Artificial hips were designed to last about 15 years. However, in 2010, DePuy recalled 2 of its hip implants – the ASR XL Acetabular System and ASR Hip Resurfacing System – after data from the National Joint Registry in England and Wales revealed that 12-13% of patients needed additional surgery within the first 5 years.
In 2009, Japanese surgeons contacted DePuy Orthopedics to express concern over health risks associated with the device. The hip system, as it turned out, had a flawed design which caused it to generate metal debris (metal ions) and cause tissue to necrotize.
By January 2013, there were more than 3,000 hip replacement lawsuits pending against DePuy over bodily harm allegedly caused by the Pinnacle device. That same year, the subsidiary stopped selling the metal-on-metal hips after the FDA strengthened its artificial hip regulations. [3] [2]
As of the end of 2016, J&J and DePuy have been slammed with more than 8,400 lawsuits over the device.Metallosis
Metallosis is a fancy word for metal poisoning. It occurs when microscopic metal particles are shed by devices like hip and knee implants into the blood stream and surrounding tissues. These particles – made up of a blend of different metals including chromium, cobalt, nickel, titanium and molybdenum – can cause toxic levels of metal to build up in the body. [4]
Metallosis commonly causes:
Cardiomyopathy (heart problems), including heart failure
Psychological status change (depression, anxiety and other mental problems)
Visual impairment that may lead to blindness
Cognitive impairment
Nerve problems
Thyroid problems
Auditory impairment that may lead to deafness
Skin rashes
Noise coming from the hip
Infection
Implant loosening
-
J&J Looking to Rebound From Series of Megaverdicts
Dec 7, 2016 | The Legal Intelligencer
By Amanda Bronstad
After Johnson & Johnson got hit with a $1 billion verdict last week, plaintiffs lawyers were quick to paint a portrait of the company as an aggressive litigator uninterested in settling whose actions have prompted juries to award gargantuan punitive damages. It's the same refrain that plaintiffs attorneys have been touting this year as Johnson & Johnson has gotten hammered with five big verdicts over its hip implants and talcum powder products.
But it's not a complete picture. Attorney John Beisner, who oversees all of Johnson & Johnson's products liability litigation, said 2016 just happened to be a bad year for trials. But he also pointed out that the verdicts have come out of just two courtrooms, where judges in both matters have allowed jurors to hear evidence that never should have been introduced—a key argument in appeals that have just begun.
"In both of these proceedings, the courts have been permitting the juries to hear a lot of 'evidence' that has nothing to do with the case or has no foundation," said Beisner, leader of the mass torts, insurance and consumer litigation group at Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom. "I'm not talking about a little indiscretion. This is whole swathes of evidence that were allowed to be placed before the jury."
To be sure, Pinnacle hip implants and talcum powder aren't Johnson & Johnson's only legal problems. A big player in pharmaceutical drugs and medical devices, the New Brunswick, New Jersey-based company has another 60,000 lawsuits against it over its transvaginal mesh devices, blood thinner medication Xarelto and prescription antipsychotic Risperdal.
But on Dec. 1, a federal jury in Dallas awarded $1.04 billion to six plaintiffs who claimed that Johnson & Johnson's DePuy Orthopaedics Inc. unit failed to warn about defects in its Pinnacle hip implants that caused pain and subsequent removal surgeries. It was the third bellwether in multidistrict litigation that involves more than 8,500 cases. In March, another federal jury in Dallas awarded $502 million to five plaintiffs over the same device.
Lead plaintiffs lawyer W. Mark Lanier was quick to demand Johnson & Johnson settle the Pinnacle cases given that "anyone who sees the evidence will be appalled" at its conduct. Plaintiffs attorney Ted Meadows made similar remarks about Johnson & Johnson's conduct after winning verdicts of $55 million, $70 million and $72 million in cases alleging its talcum powder products caused women to get ovarian cancer.
In litigation over transvaginal mesh devices, plaintiffs attorneys have blamed Johnson & Johnson's legal strategy when explaining why its Ethicon Inc. unit has refused to settle while defendants with similar devices have resolved similar suits.
But there's another side to that portrayal.
Johnson & Johnson's ultimate goal is "to generate the most closure possible for the least amount of money," said Elizabeth Burch, a professor at the University of Georgia School of Law who follows mass torts. Like other pharmaceutical and medical device firms, Johnson & Johnson has adapted its strategy based on various factors, such as whether the product was recalled. In 2013, for instance, Johnson & Johnson paid $2.5 billion to settle lawsuits by about 8,000 people over ASR hip implants, a recalled product made by DePuy. But Johnson & Johnson still sells its iconic baby powder, the main product at issue in the talcum powder litigation.
"It's much more difficult when you're still marketing the product to try to get the kind of closure you'd want to get through a massive settlement," Burch said. "So your best strategy is to play hardball and convince plaintiffs attorneys to stop bringing those cases."
Johnson & Johnson, which expects worldwide sales this year to surpass $72 billion, has an arsenal of trial teams. In the hip implant litigation, Quattlebaum, Grooms & Tull of Little Rock, Arkansas, stepped in for the third trial after Locke Lord lost the second one. In the talcum powder litigation, a team from Shook, Hardy & Bacon handled the first two trials, with Nelson Mullins Riley & Scarborough coming in for the third.
Johnson & Johnson's lawyers express confidence that the verdicts will get reversed on appeal. Already, the $502 million verdict has been revised downward to $150 million under Texas law.
In the talcum powder cases, Johnson & Johnson has insisted that 22nd Judicial Circuit Court Judge Rex Burlison allowed scientific evidence into trial that should never have been there. And in the hip implant litigation, the company has chastised U.S. District Judge Ed Kinkeade of the Northern District of Texas, a George W. Bush appointee, for changing the bellwether trial plan from individual trials, as was the case in the first trial that ended with a defense win in 2014, to those involving multiple plaintiffs. Johnson & Johnson also has attacked the judge for his evidentiary rulings.
If those verdicts get reversed, Johnson & Johnson might finally find settlement to be more advantageous, Burch said.
-
Q&A: Lanier on Billion-Dollar Verdicts and the Trump Effect
Dec 6, 2016 | Texas Lawyer
By Scott Flaherty
Winning a $1 billion jury verdict against a major company would be the pinnacle of most lawyers' careers. W. Mark Lanier of The Lanier Law Firm in Houston—whose biggest trial win clocked in at a whopping $9 billion—isn't most lawyers.
Lanier notched his latest billion-dollar victory last week, when a jury in Dallas awarded $1.04 billion to six plaintiffs from California who challenged the safety of a hip implant made by Johnson & Johnson's DePuy Orthopaedics Inc. unit.
He has now tried three bellwethers in the hip implant litigation, losing the first in 2014 and winning the second in March 2016 with a $502 million jury verdict for a group of five plaintiffs from Texas. That award was revised downward to $150 million under Texas law.
After his latest win, Lanier said the facts paved the way for an easy victory. Still, he took aim at J&J and its lawyers at Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom, saying they used the press to pressure the Dallas federal judge overseeing the hip cases. This interview was edited for length and clarity.
Have you ever sat down and counted up the total dollar value of your winning verdicts over the years?
I'm embarrassed to say that I would do something so narcissistic and petty, but yeah I did. I confess. I'm between $12 and $13 billion at this point.
How does this latest trial compare with your past cases?
I'd love to take credit for some great, huge, hard-to-believe win. But the bottom line is, in spite of the media machine that Johnson & Johnson pumps, these are easy cases. This company was flat wrong, they did some horrible things and their best appellate point is, 'Gee, the jury shouldn't be allowed to know everything we did.' That's pretty pathetic.
How would you rate J&J's defense efforts?
They've got the best lawyers and witnesses that money can buy. Money has been no object to them. They're just playing cards that are really tough cards. I think the lawyers are exceptional. It's been an honor to stand in the courtroom with them; it's been a challenge to stand in the courtroom—they pull every good defense lawyer trick there is to try and obfuscate and all the rest of that mess, and we just fight it.
You've said you're surprised that J&J hasn't yet settled. What stands out to you about the company's approach?
I've never seen anyone try to manipulate the media as much as they have. They try to intimidate the judge by saying caustic things about him in media accounts and in their press releases. They try and poison the well with the appellate court, the Fifth Circuit, and try to align the Fifth Circuit through their manipulations of the press. And I've never seen that before—I don't know if that's the Skadden Arps way, I don't know if it's the Johnson & Johnson way. But that's the part that has stunned me and it's seemed different than everything else.
It's almost a Donald Trump saga. We live in an age now, with Donald Trump, where I guess it's OK to take out after judges, it's just OK to take out after people with stuff that just never would have been said. I mean, what Donald Trump said about the judge in the Trump University case—that is not, historically, the way people handle lawsuits; you don't use the media to try and get your public points across. So, I don't know, maybe it's a sign of the times.
[Note: Johnson & Johnson lawyer John Beisner at Skadden had this response to Lanier's comments: "The companies have appropriately addressed what we believe are errors in the trials, and we stand behind the previous statements. The last two verdicts from the same courtroom perfectly illustrate the distortions and confusion inherent in multi-plaintiff trials and underscore the extent of the legal errors that have been repeated. This verdict only reinforces the need for appellate review, and the company will continue to fully defend against the claims in this litigation.
Mr. Lanier seems to be embracing the contradictory position that he is free to comment publicly on the litigation as he has in this interview yet that the companies should not be able to express their views."]
What's next for you and your firm?
This year, this case has been my foray into the courts. Our next [hip implant trial] is not set until September, so I've got a number of cases I'll be trying before that. I've got an active docket beyond this. I just keep going.
-
Johnson & Johnson hit with over $1 billion verdict on hip implants
Dec 8, 2016 | The Villages Sun Times
By Max Garcia
A Texas jury has ordered the corporation to pay over $1 billion to patients who alleged that J&J did not fully disclose information on its Pinnacle artificial hips.
This is the second line of J&J hip replacement implants that have triggered lawsuits. The rest went to punitive damages - an award to punish defendants and discourage further wrongdoing. "These are the largest punitive damages assessed on a company in the United States this year, and hopefully it will send a clear message to pharmaceutical companies out there that if you put profit above safety, there will be accountability and penalties", he continued.
A federal jury in Dallas awarded the money Thursday in a closely watched trial over the Pinnacle implant made by its DePuy Orthopaedics division. The pharma major has been facing around 9,000 lawsuits over Pinnacle hip implants with clients accusing the company of mishandling the metal-on-metal hips.
Lawyers for J&J said U.S. District Judge Ed Kinkeade's rulings barred J&J from providing "a fair presentation to the jury". Johnson & Johnson and DePuy have also appealed the jury verdict in the case. "DePuy acted appropriately and responsibly in the design and testing of ULTAMET Metal-on-Metal, and the product is backed by a strong track record of clinical data showing reduced pain and restored mobility for patients suffering from chronic hip pain", said DePuy spokesperson Mindy Tinsley.
The company rejected a $1.8 million settlement offer from the plaintiffs before trial, Lanier said. This led to the device having to be surgically removed.
The next bellwether trial concerns 10 patients and has been slated for September 2017 in Dallas, according to The Lanier Law Firm. "They may think they have good defenses to these claims, but they don't seem to be working with juries", Erik Gordon, a law professor at the University of MI, told BusinessWeek. The cases have been consolidated in Texas federal court, and test cases have been chosen for trial.
Johnson & Johnson's attorneys were critical of the decision, which will be appealed.
-
Jurors award more than $1B in hip implant case
Dec 8, 2016 | Vivere Milano
It was alleged that DePuy and parent company Johnson & Johnson knew about these risks, but continued to market the Pinnacle Ultamet hip implant nonetheless. The computer navigation and imaging system enables the medical team to determine an exact surgical site and angle at which hip implants should be placed, minimizing the incision and encouraging quick recovery. In some cases, the cobalt-and-chromium material caused an infection that forced the patient to have the artificial hips surgically removed.
J&J already has around 9,000 lawsuits pending on mishandling these artificial hips. They concluded the implants were defectively designed and the defendants failed to warn consumers of the risks.
"The jury is telling J&J that they better settle these cases soon", Lanier said. "This jury spoke loud and clear, and I hope J&J will finally listen".
Metal-on-metal implants like the Pinnacle caused controversy after studies surfaced showing they had higher failure rates than other types of devices. In the second MDL bellwether trial in early 2016, a jury found against Johnson & Johnson and DePuy, and the companies have appealed. Johnson & Johnson and DePuy have appealed that ruling. The cases have been consolidated in Texas federal court, and test cases have been chosen for trial.
Since the six hip recipients who sued J&J were all California residents, that state's law governs the handling of punitive damages awarded in the case. The company will likely appeal the decision, but University of MI law professor Erik Gordon says that company may want to start making settlement offers to the thousands of potential claimants across the country.
The next DePuy Pinnacle metal-on-metal hip implant bellwether trial is slated to begin in September 2017.
Sarah Moore, solicitor for the UK Pinnacle Ultamet litigation, said: "The latest verdict from the U.S. underscores the fact that Depuy marketed a product, implanted into thousands of people worldwide, which has caused patients to suffer significant pain, injury and revision surgery as a direct result of Depuys' Pinnacle Ultamet device".
-
J&J hit with more than $1bn verdict over defective hip implants
Dec 8, 2016 | Equilibrio Informativo
By Valasco Ojeda
A federal jury in Dallas on Thursday ordered Johnson & Johnson and its DePuy Orthopaedics unit to pay more than $1 billion to six plaintiffs who said they were injured by Pinnacle hip implants. The $1.041 billion verdict was comprised of $32 million in compensatory damage, and the remainder of the award was in punitive damages.
The company pulled the devices from the market in 2013 after the US Food and Drug Administration tightened restrictions on hip replacements. The jurors found that the companies failed to warn patients and doctors about the risks of using the product. Judge Kinkeade is scheduled to hear more bellwether trials in September 2017, however attorneys for defendant J&J have requested a stay on such proceedings until their appeal of the current verdict has been resolved, according to Bloomberg news. Plaintiffs' lawyer Mark Lanier told Reuters that Johnson & Johnson rejected a $1.8 million settlement offer from the plaintiffs before trial.
J&J and DePuy are facing almost 8,400 lawsuits over the devices, which have been consolidated in federal court in Texas. J&J have denied liability in these cases and according to Fortune.com, will appeal the decision to the Appeals Court.
Depuy spokeswoman Mindy Tinsley said her company "acted appropriately and responsibly in the design and testing of" the device. The rest were punitive damages. At least one had received double hip implants. The company recalled a different brand, the ASR device, in 2010, and set aside $2.5 billion to compensate patients for damages.
"They may think they have good defenses to these claims, but they don't seem to be working with juries. They better start thinking of how they can settle these claims before the price goes up any more".
Johnson & Johnson contends the trial judge made incorrect rulings that unfairly hampered the company in presenting its case. The lead case in this trial was Andrews v. DePuy Orthopedics, 15-cv-03484-K, U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas (Dallas).
-
Johnson & Johnson ordered to pay $1 billion settlement
Dec 8, 2016 | Solo News
By Domezio Lambertini
The six plaintiffs were implanted with the hip devices and experienced tissue death, bone erosion and other injuries they attributed to design flaws.
More than 8,500 plaintiffs have sued Johnson & Johnson in the Pinnacle implant cases. The awarded totaled $1,041,311,648.17 and includes $28,311,648.17 total in personal injury damages for the six plaintiffs; $4 million in loss of consortium damages. The rest were punitive damages. J&J have denied liability in these cases and according to Fortune.com, will appeal the decision to the Appeals Court.
"DePuy acted appropriately and responsibly in the design and testing of ULTAMET Metal-on-Metal, and the product is backed by a strong track record of clinical data showing reduced pain and restored mobility for patients suffering from chronic hip pain", said Mindy Tinsley, a DePuy spokeswoman.
According to the lawsuits filed, plaintiffs allege that the Depuy hip implants caused chromium and cobalt to infiltrate into their bloodstreams, resulting in cobalt poisoning and a failure of the entire hip implant itself.
Each of the patients had to undergo a second, or revision, surgery to replace the devices and fix tissue damage and bone erosion. The lead case in this trial was Andrews v. DePuy Orthopedics, 15-cv-03484-K, U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas (Dallas).
Johnson & Johnson contends the trial judge made incorrect rulings that unfairly hampered the company in presenting its case.
Test cases such as this one help to establish the price of the remaining claims.
In the first trial, in 2014, a jury ruled in favor of the medical companies.
So far this year, J&J has lost three multimillion-dollar baby powder trials, a $70 million Risperdal trial, and has agreed to a confidential Risperdal settlement that likely cost the company millions of dollars.
Johnson & Johnson agreed to pay $2.5 billion in 2013 to settle litigation over its ASR hip devices that were recalled in 2010.
The fourth bellwether trial is scheduled for September 2017.
-
J&J slammed with $1B verdict over metal-on-metal hip implants
Dec 8, 2016 | Senegal Actu
By Mercedes Poole
J&J stopped selling the devices in 2013 after the U.S. Food and Drug Administration toughened artificial-hip regulations. The rest were punitive damages. "These are the largest punitive damages assessed on a company in the United States this year, and hopefully it will send a clear message to pharmaceutical companies out there that if you put profit above safety, there will be accountability and penalties", he continued. The third Pinnacle hip implant trial finished closing statements earlier this week and the jury quickly returned a verdict.
The hip implants have components that can grind against each other, causing metal ions to be shed into the bloodstream. Iri Liebergall puts together an artificial hip implant as he announces the first ever use of breakthrough imaging technology in hip replacement surgery, at a press conference February 12, 2004 at Hadassah hospital in Jerusalem. It still faces more than 8,000 lawsuits associated with the Pinnacle hips. The jury also found J&J liable for aiding and abetting DePuy in each of the seven causes of action, and for conspiring on the six other claims.
Experts say the latest $1 billion dollar verdict should be a wake-up call for J&J.
After that loss, J&J requested a stay of all court proceedings, which Judge Kinkeade denied, according to court documents. There has been no settlement of these cases to date, however our reporters will be keeping an eye on things in the coming months and will keep our readers updated on how this litigation progresses.
According to the wire service, a plaintiffs' offer to settle for $1.8 million before trial had been refused by the company.
Depuy spokeswoman Mindy Tinsley said her company "acted appropriately and responsibly in the design and testing of" the device. This led to the device having to be surgically removed.
A fourth bellwether trial is scheduled for September 2017.
"They may think they have good defenses to these claims, but they don't seem to be working with juries", University of MI law professor Erik Gordon told Bloomberg. "They better start thinking of how they can settle these claims before the price goes up any more", he said. The multidistrict litigation has been consolidated in federal court in Dallas. Johnson & Johnson and DePuy have appealed that ruling.
National Coverage
Trade Coverage
Local Coverage
International Coverage
Full Text of Stories Below
International Coverage
Add recipients
Suggested