Audet and Partners, LLP Comments on $2 Million Verdict Awarded To Transvaginal Mesh Plaintiff

Share Article

Following approximately twelve hours of deliberation, a West Virginia jury has awarded a verdict of $2 million to a plaintiff alleging injuries resulting from the Avaulta transvaginal mesh sling manufactured by C.R. Bard.

Audet and Partners LLP
The jury verdict supports our allegations in many other cases that makers of transvaginal mesh products should be held accountable for injuries being alleged by our clients.

Following an earlier mistrial*, a West Virginia jury in the case Cisson v. C.R. Bard Inc., 11-cv-00195, U.S. District Court, Southern District of West Virginia (Charleston), has returned a $2 million verdict for the plaintiff who had alleged personal injuries resulting from implantation of the Avaulta trans-vaginal device.* On August 15, 2013, following approximately twelve hours of deliberations**, the jury rendered an award to the plaintiff in the amount of $250,000 in compensatory damages and $1.75 million in punitive damages.* C.R. Bard had previously removed its Avaulta devices from the market at the FDA told transvaginal mesh manufacturers to conduct studies on the rates of organ damage, pain during intercourse, and infection.*

The implant in the Cisson case was implanted to help prevent the plaintiff’s organs from collapsing into her pelvic area.* Instead of helping, the implant caused bleeding and painful bladder spasms.* According to lawyers for the plaintiff in the case, Bard knew that its implants were being made out of plastic that had its own warning against being permanently implanted in humans.*

Testimony introduced at trial included a videotaped deposition of Douglas Evans, a Bard engineer was played to the jury during which Mr. Evans who had noted that:

"Although some doctors are satisfied with the results they’ve achieved with synthetic sling kits, some doctors prefer not to use them due to potential infection, urethral or vaginal wall erosion because the mesh … (can) unravel, creating a fishing line effect, slicing through the patient’s tissue."***

Additionally, an expert in materials science, Anthony Brennan, Ph.D. further testified at trial that the polypropylene material, once introduced into the human body, is prone to degradation during which particles of the device may be released into the body.* The introduction of these foreign particles into the human body may lead to dangerous inflammation and other deleterious side effects.* Dr. Brennan further noted that cutting or trimming the mesh during surgery, allegedly a common practice among surgeons, can hasten material degradation and potentially exacerbate negative complications.****

Attorney William Audet, whose law firm, Audet and Partners, LLP, represents several individual plaintiffs alleging injuries caused by Transvaginal mesh implants, applauds last week’s verdict. “Evidence introduced at trial clearly explained the ways in which the polypropylene mesh is simply not suitable for implantation in the human body. Further, it appeared from the testimony that Bard knew, or should have known, of the likelihood of complications from the Avaulta sling, and yet took little or no action to protect patients. The jury verdict supports our allegations in many other cases that makers of transvaginal mesh products should be held accountable for injuries being alleged by our clients.”

If you or someone you know has suffered an injury that may be related to vaginal mesh, please contact Audet & Partners, LLP by calling us toll free at (800) 965-1461, or visit our informational website at

** N.J. News, August 15, 2013;

*** Drugwatch, August 5, 2013;

**** Justia,

Share article on social media or email:

View article via:

Pdf Print

Contact Author

William Audet, J.D., L.L.M.
Follow us on
Visit website