C.R. Bard Transvaginal Mesh Complications Lawsuits Update: Resource4thePeople Reports Bard Must Pay $2 Million in Damages in One Case and Settles Second over Allegations of Serious Side Effects

Share Article

Bard loses first of thousands of cases consolidated before federal judge. Resource4thePeople announces consumers still eligible for free consultations over allegations of serious side effects from transvaginal mesh devices as federal consolidated litigation progresses.

http://www.resource4thepeople.com/defectivemedicaldevices/transvaginal-mesh-lawsuit.html

In its latest update to consumers about consolidated transvaginal mesh failure lawsuits, Resource4thePeople reports today that C.R. Bard Inc. has been found liable for $2 million in damages in one case and settled another as the trial was scheduled to begin.*

The two cases are among of thousands of Bard mesh lawsuits from across the country filed by women who alleged the products were defective and caused them to suffer serious injuries. These cases have been consolidated into what is called a multidistrict litigation.

The $2 million in damages was awarded to a Georgia nurse who claimed that a Bard Avaulta Plus mesh implant she had in 2009 was defective and caused her to suffer serious health problems, including several corrective surgeries, according to the court file.**

In the other case, Bloomberg News reported on Aug. 21, 2013 that attorneys for Wanda Queen of North Carolina told the judge overseeing the litigation in U.S. District Court, Southern District of West Virginia that the case had been settled and the judge then dismissed the jury.

Bloomberg reported that the woman claimed that “Bard’s Avaulta insert caused pain and forced her to have six surgeries. The settlement comes a week after another West Virginia jury ordered Bard to pay $2 million in damages in a separate suit involving the product.”

“These are important developments in the litigation over allegations that these transvaginal mesh implants were defective and caused women from across the United States to suffer serious injuries,” said Resource4thePeople.

“As this litigation advances our national network of attorneys will continue to offer free consultations to other women who may also have suffered serious side effects from transvaginal mesh implants and are seeking information about their legal rights to compensation.”

Resource4thePeople notes that these two cases were selected as bellwether, or test cases from among thousands of lawsuits Bard are facing claiming that its transvaginal mesh products were defective and caused women to suffer serious injuries, according to the court file.

As the nurse's trial approached, evidence surfaced in unsealed documents that Bard was warned that plastic used in some of its Davol Unit's transvaginal mesh products was not suitable for implantation in humans, according to the court file in the case.**

Bloomberg News provided this report*** about the unsealed documents in a June 26, 2013 posting:

“Managers at Bard’s Davol unit used a resin-based plastic made by a Chevron Phillips Chemical Co. unit to produce hernia-repair mesh after the material’s supplier officially registered a warning that it shouldn’t be permanently implanted in people, according to e-mails and documents in a lawsuit over Bard’s implants. Plaintiffs suing Bard contend the same mesh was used in some of Davol’s vaginal-mesh products.”

The cases have been consolidated under U.S. District Judge Joseph R. Goodwin who is also presiding over similar allegations about transvaginal mesh products from other manufacturers.

Resource4thePeople is providing consumers this outline of the remaining transvaginal mesh litigations that have been consolidated and remain under the jurisdiction of the judge:

  •     In re: American Medical Systems, Inc., Pelvic Repair Systems Products Liability Litigation (MDL-2325)
  •     In re: Boston Scientific Corp., Pelvic Repair System Products Liability Litigation (MDL-2326)
  •     In re: C. R. Bard, Inc. Pelvic System Products Liability Litigation (MDL-2187)
  •     In re: Ethicon, Inc., Pelvic Repair System Products Liability Litigation (MDL-2327)

The lawsuits claim that mesh products designed to treat pelvic organ prolapse or incontinence failed and caused them to suffer serious side effects, including infections, organ damage, vaginal pain and other health problems, according to the court files.

There is also a multidistrict litigation involving transvaginal mesh, in New Jersey, where which Bloomberg News reported on Feb. 28, 2013**** that a jury awarded over $11 million in compensatory and punitive damages to a South Dakota woman.

The South Dakota woman's lawsuit over a Johnson & Johnson Gynecare Prolift was the first to go to trial from among 2,100 transvaginal state court mesh lawsuits consolidated in New Jersey.*****

In the West Virginia litigation involving CR Bard, Bloomberg also reported in its June 26, 2013 posting that in 2004 and 2007 e-mails a Davol executive warned colleagues not to tell Chevron Phillips or other resin makers that the company was using the material in medical devices placed in humans, according to the unsealed court file.

“Suppliers such as Chevron Phillips ‘will likely not be interested in a medical application due to product-liability concerns,’ Roger Darois, the Davol executive, now a Bard vice president, said in a March 2004 e-mail,” Bloomberg reported from the court file. “’It is likely they do not know of our implant application. Please do not mention Davol’s name in any discussion with these manufacturers.’”

Bloomberg reported that “lawyers for thousands of women who blame Bard’s Avaulta line of implants for their injuries said the files show Davol officials knew the resin-based mesh wasn’t proper for human implantation and tried to cover up their use of the material."

Transvaginal mesh side effects were detailed by a Food and Drug Administration warning of “serious complications associated with transvaginal placement of surgical mesh for pelvic organ prolapse."******

Sources:

**Cisson v. C.R. Bard Inc., 2:11-cv-00195, U.S. District Court, Southern District of West Virginia (Charleston)
***http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-06-26/bard-used-mesh-plastic-found-unfit-for-humans-by-supplier.html
**** http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-02-28/j-j-owes-7-76-million-in-punitives-in-vaginal-mesh-case.html
*****Gross v. Gynecare Inc., Atl-L-6966-10, Superior Court of Atlantic County, New Jersey (Atlantic City)
******http://www.fda.gov/MedicalDevices/Safety/AlertsandNotices/ucm262435

Share article on social media or email:

View article via:

Pdf Print

Contact Author

Bill Callahan
iLawSuit
+1 (858) 602-2749
Email >
Visit website