Product Liability Lawyer Blog

September 26, 2013

Consumers Union Calls for a Warranty on Hip and Knee Implants to Protect Patients: Can This Solve Problems for Patients?

Hip and knee implants are common to replace damaged and aging joints, and Consumer Reports writes that aggressive marketing to aging baby boomers and young consumers is likely to result in increased demand for these procedures in the future. By 2030, the number of hip and knee replacement surgeries is expected to quadruple. This means that more than four million people each year will get a replacement hip or a replacement knee.

Hip and knee replacement products should provide increased mobility and a more pain-free life to patients, but unfortunately this has not proved to be the case for many patients who had defective hip implant products implanted. With demand for hip replacement devices expected to grow so dramatically, our Boston defective hip implant lawyers know that steps need to be taken to protect the public from being harmed by dangerous medical devices. Consumer Reports has suggested that hip implant manufacturers be required to provide a warranty, but is this the answer?
Continue reading

September 23, 2013

Defective Hip Implants Cause Real Harm to Patients

by Jeffrey S. Glassman

Hundreds of lawsuits have been filed against Stryker Orthopaedics as a result of its defective hip-implant products and the company routinely faces claims from new plaintiffs as the hip implants continue to fail. Almost 400 Stryker cases have been consolidated in New Jersey alone as part of a multi-county litigation following the recall of the Stryker Rejuvenate and ABG II Modular-Neck Hip Stems. And evidence continues to mount that the Stryker devices have a high failure rate and are prone to loosening. Yet, even amidst this storm of litigation, the Motley Fool speculates that the company could be destined for greatness due to its favorable financials.

Our Boston defective hip implant attorneys know that the statistics on the hundreds harmed by these defective medical products only begin to tell the story of the losses caused. Every individual plaintiff has his own story and deserves a chance at justice. But unfortunately, medical device manufacturers often forget about these individual victims when they release dangerous products into the marketplace that they expect will earn a handsome profit.
Continue reading

September 20, 2013

Follow These Bellwether Cases Identified In Boston Scientific Transvaginal Mesh MDL

by Jeffrey S. Glassman

In the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia, there are currently six separate coordinated litigations pending against transvaginal mesh manufacturers, including Boston Scientific. To facilitate the processing of claims, more than 22,000 federal lawsuits have been consolidated into the individual multi-district litigations (MDLs) in West Virginia that are currently pending before Judge Joseph Goodwin. Multi-district litigation refers to the consolidation of cases before a single judge to resolve certain issues applicable to many individual cases against a defendant.

Judge Goodwin has now identified four cases that will go forward as bellwether trials in the multi-district litigation against Boston Scientific. Our Boston transvaginal mesh lawyers know that the bellwether cases will have an important impact on Boston Scientific’s willingness to resolve future claims through settlements with injured victims. Those harmed by transvaginal mesh should thus keep abreast the progress of these cases.
Continue reading

September 14, 2013

Organ Implant Malpractice Case Heads to Court

by Jeffrey S. Glassman

No surgery is without potential risks.

The Ohio man knew that when he signed up to donate a kidney to his sister, who was in desperate need of one. What he most certainly didn’t anticipate was the risk that his perfectly good kidney would be thrown away before it made it to his sister.

And yet, our Boston medical malpractice attorneys understand that is exactly what happened recently at the University of Toledo Medical Center.
Continue reading

September 13, 2013

Transvaginal Mesh Plaintiff Wins $2 Million Lawsuit Against Bard

by Jeffrey S. Glassman

In a case that was being closely-watched by those in the legal community, a jury awarded $2 million to a woman who alleged C.R. Bard Inc. concealed information regarding the inherent flaws of its transvaginal mesh implant products.

Our Boston transvaginal mesh attorneys know that this case was the first to go to federal trial in widespread claims of flaws regarding the device.

The verdict in the case of Cisson et al v. C.R. Bard, Inc was especially welcome given that the first time around, the case resulted in a mistrial.
Continue reading

September 12, 2013

Compounding Pharmacy Dangers Persist

by Jeffrey S. Glassman

It’s been almost a year since a fungal meningitis outbreak swept the country, with officials later tracing the cases to Massachusetts compounding pharmacies.

compounding pharmacy injuries continue as lawmakers and public officials begin drawing a harder line with regard to regulation of these facilities.

Unfortunately, despite numerous promises, those regulatory actions have been slow to form, even as more compounding pharmacy drugs face recall, continuing to cause serious illness and even death.
Continue reading

September 11, 2013

Defective Medical Device Watch: DePuy Hip Lawsuit Postponed

by Jeffrey S. Glassman

All eyes have been on the case of McCracken v. DePuy Orthopaedics Inc., the first bellwether trial scheduled in the federal court multi-district litigation over Johnson & Johnson’s DePuy unit metal hip implants.

Our Boston DePuy hip replacement injury attorneys know that the trial had been slated to begin Sept. 9, 2013, but the judge has postponed the case at least two weeks in order to settle a number of legal rulings that have to be made prior to jury selection.

In complex cases like this, such delays aren’t uncommon.
Continue reading

September 10, 2013

Consumer Reports: Defective Hip, Knee Replacements Need Lemon Law

by Jeffrey S. Glassman

Imagine you just bought a brand new car, fresh on the market.

Days later, you learn that a number of the parts are defective, part of a manufacturer’s flaw. Even so, when you return the dealership, you are expected to pay extra to fix those problems.

Such a situation would be fundamentally unfair, and would violate state and federal lemon laws. And yet, our Boston product liability attorneys understand this is exactly what we are expecting of those who have been given faulty hip and knee replacements.
Continue reading