Preview Newsletter
Ethicon 11/3
-
Woman says law firm coerced her into settling pelvic mesh case
Nov 2, 2017 | West Virginia Record
By Chris Dickerson
A Georgia law firm involved in pelvic mesh litigation is asking for a federal court to dismiss a legal malpractice case against it. -
Welcome to Mesh Medical Device News Desk (MND)
Nov 1, 2017 | Medical Mesh Device News Desk
By Jane Akre
Welcome to Mesh Medical Device News Desk, your website for news and updates on pelvic and hernia mesh, its implications, complications and outcomes, both medically and legally.
Client Attorney Privileged/Attorney Work Product/At Request of Counsel
Online Sources
-
Woman says law firm coerced her into settling pelvic mesh case
Nov 2, 2017 | West Virginia Record
By Chris Dickerson
A Georgia law firm involved in pelvic mesh litigation is asking for a federal court to dismiss a legal malpractice case against it.
Danna Morrison originally had filed the malpractice lawsuit in May against the law firm of Blasingame, Burch, Garrard & Ashley PC in Marion County, Tennessee. It later was transferred to federal court in Tennessee before being moved to the Southern District of West Virginia in October because the parties are involved in Multi-District Litigation involving pelvic mesh lawsuits that are being heard in Charleston.
In her original complaint, Morrison says she was experienced multiple health problems after receiving a pelvic mesh implant several years ago. She says she saw a television advertisement for the law firm and called the firm to discuss representation. Morrison says she did sign a contract for representation in October 2011.
In 2015, Morrison says the firm advised her to accept a settlement offer of $325,000. She declined to accept the offer, and told the firm she wanted to have a trial because “she felt her case was worth substantially more than the offer.”
Subsequent to hiring the Athens-based firm, Morrison says she had to file a personal bankruptcy primarily because of medical bills from the multiple surgeries she had to have. The firm contacted Morrison’s bankruptcy trustee and notified them of the settlement offer that had been made.
Meanwhile, Morrison says the firm continued to “pressure her” to accept the $325,000 settlement offer. She still declined, believing she could get a verdict or settlement in excess of seven figures.
Morrison claims the firm then made misrepresentations to her that she relied on to eventually accept the settlement offer. Among those misrepresentations, she claims the firm told her that if she didn’t take the offer, the bankruptcy trustee would decide to take the offer and accept the settlement for her. She says the firm also told her if she didn’t accept the offer, it would get the trustee to settle the case and she would “lose everything,” not receive any money from the settlement and would not be eligible to have a trial.
“The plaintiff was extremely upset when she was told all this, but based upon the representations being made to her by the defendant law firm, she felt she had no choice but to follow their directions and agreed to settle for an amount far less than she wanted to,” the complaint states.
When she did settle, she says she was told by the firm that she had received an award from a Special Master in the approximate amount of $300,000, “which was still substantially less than she ever would have voluntarily have settled for.”
In May 2016, Morrison says she hired a personal bankruptcy lawyer. It was then she says she learned of the “false and misleading statements” made to her by the law firm.
Morrison accused the firm of professional negligence and professional fault, of making negligent misrepresentations of fact and had a substantial financial interest in settling because of a 40 percent contingent fee arrangement. She says the firm breached its contractual duties to her, breached the common law duty of good faith and fair dealing and breached its fiduciary duties to her.
She claims she never would have settled the case for the amount the firm told her “she had to settle for” and lost the opportunity to have a trial because of the firm’s misconduct.
Morrison seeks compensatory damages, attorney fees, court costs and other relief. She is being represented by Michael E. Richardson of Tidwell, Izell and Richardson of Chattanooga, Tennessee.
In an Oct. 30 motion to dismiss, the law firm asks for the case to be dismissed, claiming there is lack of standing and failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted.
“Plaintiff … agreed to the settlement,” the motion states. “So too did the U.S. Bankruptcy Trustee in plaintiff’s Chapter 7 bankruptcy case. The U.S. Bankruptcy Court approved the settlement. The settlement funds have now been distributed. …
“In addition, based upon plaintiff’s agreement to settlement in her bankruptcy case and the bankruptcy court’s independent determination that the settlement was fair and equitable, plaintiff’s claims are barred by the doctrines of judicial estoppel and collateral attack.”
The firm is being represented by Andrew J. Godbold and William E. Godbold III of the Chattanooga firm of Leitner, Williams, Dooley & Napolitan as well as John P. Konvalinka of the Chattanooga firm of Grant, Konvalinka & Harrison and local counsel Shawn P. George of the Charleston firm of George & Lorensen PLLC.
U.S. District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia case number 2:17-cv-04133
https://wvrecord.com/stories/511258598-woman-says-law-firm-coerced-her-into-settling-pelvic-mesh-case
-
Welcome to Mesh Medical Device News Desk (MND)
Nov 1, 2017 | Medical Mesh Device News Desk
By Jane Akre
Welcome to Mesh Medical Device News Desk, your website for news and updates on pelvic and hernia mesh, its implications, complications and outcomes, both medically and legally.
If you are new to the mesh mess, welcome! Mesh News Desk (MND) aka MMDND has been covering this issue for more than five years now.
We are not beholden to any influences here, just coverage that is in the public interest. Advertisers or sponsors are clearly labeled. Advertisers are welcome!! I look forward to receiving any essays by you all and your comments are often enlightening and informative.
Please no personal bashing or expletives. Thank you. And please do not use your real names since lawyers have advised most women to keep a low profile online.
This website should not be considered medical or legal advice. Please use the Search Bar (page one upper right hand corner) to look up any stories from the archives!
Also did you know you can click on the “Heading ie, News, Legal, Medical etc. and find stories filed under that heading?
As you may know, there were so many pelvic mesh cases that multidistrict litigation was formed (MDL) in January 2012 in Charleston, WV to handle all of the cases. There are now man more pelvic mesh cases filed in California and New Jersey. The numbers continue to expand as doctors continue to use transvaginal polypropylene (PP) mesh to treat incontinence and even for pelvic organ prolapse.
POP mesh has been reclassified as “high risk” so patients should understand even the Food and Drug Administration hesitates to recommend it as a first-line therapy.
If your doctor suggests a “hammock” or “tape” might be a good solution, understand that is PP “mesh” with upward of a 30% complication rate. Most women writing on these pages say it is the worst decision of their life. Admittedly, these are the patients who did not do well, others do okay, at least for time being. No one knows what the long-term consequences will be.
Know what questions to ask your doctor (here) and find out if he/she can harvest a “sling” from your own body.
As 2017 comes to a close many of you are waiting to hear about your settlements. Have you been offered one without a final number? Do you write checks and let the recipient fill in the amount? Please insist on knowing what your final settlement dollars will be. Know how to fire your attorney if need be (here). See which manufacturers are settling cases (here).Welcome to Mesh Medical Device News Desk (MND)
MND #Mesh Too logo
Mesh Medical Device News Desk, November 1, 2017 ~ Welcome to Mesh Medical Device News Desk, your website for news and updates on pelvic and hernia mesh, its implications, complications and outcomes, both medically and legally.
If you are new to the mesh mess, welcome! Mesh News Desk (MND) aka MMDND has been covering this issue for more than five years now.
We are not beholden to any influences here, just coverage that is in the public interest. Advertisers or sponsors are clearly labeled. Advertisers are welcome!! I look forward to receiving any essays by you all and your comments are often enlightening and informative.
Please no personal bashing or expletives. Thank you. And please do not use your real names since lawyers have advised most women to keep a low profile online.
This website should not be considered medical or legal advice. Please use the Search Bar (page one upper right hand corner) to look up any stories from the archives!
Also did you know you can click on the “Heading ie, News, Legal, Medical etc. and find stories filed under that heading?
As you may know, there were so many pelvic mesh cases that multidistrict litigation was formed (MDL) in January 2012 in Charleston, WV to handle all of the cases. There are now man more pelvic mesh cases filed in California and New Jersey. The numbers continue to expand as doctors continue to use transvaginal polypropylene (PP) mesh to treat incontinence and even for pelvic organ prolapse.
POP mesh has been reclassified as “high risk” so patients should understand even the Food and Drug Administration hesitates to recommend it as a first-line therapy.
If your doctor suggests a “hammock” or “tape” might be a good solution, understand that is PP “mesh” with upward of a 30% complication rate. Most women writing on these pages say it is the worst decision of their life. Admittedly, these are the patients who did not do well, others do okay, at least for time being. No one knows what the long-term consequences will be.
Know what questions to ask your doctor (here) and find out if he/she can harvest a “sling” from your own body.
As 2017 comes to a close many of you are waiting to hear about your settlements. Have you been offered one without a final number? Do you write checks and let the recipient fill in the amount? Please insist on knowing what your final settlement dollars will be. Know how to fire your attorney if need be (here). See which manufacturers are settling cases (here).
As of today – there are 104,749 product liability lawsuits filed in Judge Goodwin’s court alone. The MDL never imagined cases would swell to this number. More are added every month!
If you have hernia mesh, it is made of the same polypropylene and some law firms are starting to take these cases seriously. Stay tuned as MNDplans more on the latest hernia mesh litigation efforts. Dr. Robert Bendavid graciously answers questions for MND readers. Write him here.
Lawyers are presently seeking clients who have complications from C-Qur hernia mesh as well as Physiomesh by Ethicon, but MND gets calls from people implanted with Prolite, UltraPro and Kugel who are also having problems. Perhaps it is the polypropylene(PP)?
Stay well and learn from each other. Lawyers – call your clients and or run a PR release through Mesh News Desk so many could have the benefit of seeing it at the same time. How’s that for a win-win!
Please feel free to share you experience on these pages, and if you choose, your donations would help offset the costs involved with this effort. Thank you.
Stay well friends,
Jane Akre, Editor
MND
https://www.meshmedicaldevicenewsdesk.com/welcome-mesh-medical-device-news-desk-mnd/
Client Attorney Privileged/Attorney Work Product/At Request of Counsel
Online Sources
Add recipients
Suggested