Lawsuits Against DePuy Hip Implant Manufacturer Grow

Share Article

Lawsuits against DePuy Orthopaedics, a division of Johnson & Johnson, continue to be filed by patients who received the company’s defectively manufactured hip replacement devices. On January 25, 2011, a Scottsdale, Arizona woman sued Johnson & Johnson and its subsidiary DePuy Orthopaedics in the San Francisco, California Superior Court.

Even DePuy patients who are presently free of symptoms should consult their physicians for evaluation. All should be monitored for as long as their DePuy ASR implants are in place.

Lawsuits against DePuy Orthopaedics, a division of Johnson & Johnson, continue to be filed by patients who received the company’s defectively manufactured hip replacement devices. Earlier this month, about a dozen Tennessee residents sued the manufacturer in the U.S. District Court in Nashville.

On January 25, 2011, a Scottsdale, Arizona woman, Jacqueline Chamberlin, sued Johnson & Johnson and its subsidiary DePuy Orthopaedics in the San Francisco, California Superior Court. The lawsuit alleges that the manufacturers sold the ASR™ XL Acetabular System for more than five years, while receiving and concealing repeated warnings of aberrantly high failure rates.

Last August, DePuy voluntarily recalled its ASR™ XL Acetabular System hip replacement after a report published in the United Kingdom revealed that an abnormally
large number of patients needed corrective surgery within five years of implantation.

The Federal Food and Drug Administration (FDA) began receiving complaints about the DePuy devices in 2008. Medical experts say that the DePuy hip replacement cup is too shallow, and that it is more difficult for surgeons to implant than is the case with other similar prosthetic hip implants.

According to Jonathan O’Steen, a Phoenix attorney who represents Jacqueline Chamberlin and a number of other DePuy patients, as many as 11,000 people may eventually require surgery to remove and replace the defective implants. “Even DePuy patients who are presently free of symptoms should consult their physicians for evaluation,” according to O’Steen. “All should be monitored for as long as their DePuy ASR implants are in place,” he added.

Questioned about DePuy’s offer to assist patients with the costs of additional medical care, O’Steen advised against dealing directly with the company. “The limitations and strings attached to DePuy’s plan are greatly inadequate. Furthermore, participants in the company program are required to sign medical release forms giving wide access to their confidential medical records.”

O’Steen advises all DePuy hip implant patients to consult a lawyer who handles these cases.

CHAMBERLIN v. JOHNSON & JOHNSON SERVICES, INC. ET AL. Reference: California Superior Court, San Francisco County, Case No, CGC-11-507615. Brandon Gee, Middle Tennesseans Join Lawsuit Against Prosthetic Hip Maker, The Tennessean, Jan. 15, 2011.

# # #

Share article on social media or email:

View article via:

Pdf Print

Contact Author

Jonathan O'Steen
Visit website