FREE Case Evaluation: 1-800-375-6160
Victims are filing hernia mesh lawsuits because they believe that the surgical mesh used in their hernia repairs was defective and led to serious complications, including chronic pain, infections, and additional surgeries. The surgical hernia mesh implants used are intended to provide support to weakened or damaged tissue, often after a hernia repair.
However, in some cases, the mesh itself has been the source of significant medical problems. Patients have reported a range of complications, including the mesh migrating from the original site, adhesion to internal tissues, and even perforation of surrounding organs. These complications often require additional surgical interventions to remove or replace the mesh, leading to extended periods of discomfort and recovery.
By filing lawsuits, hernia mesh victims aim to hold the hernia mesh manufacturers accountable for releasing a potentially defective product into the market. Legal actions can also provide a pathway for patients to receive financial compensation for their medical bills, lost wages, pain and suffering, and other hardships they’ve endured due to complications from defective hernia mesh devices. This litigation serves as a means for individual justice and a call for better oversight and quality control in medical products.
The main health implication of hernia mesh is the risk of chronic pain following the surgical procedure. Patients have reported ongoing discomfort that can interfere with daily activities and significantly impact their quality of life. This chronic pain often necessitates additional surgeries to remove or adjust the hernia mesh cases, leading to a prolonged recovery period.
Besides chronic pain, the following are the other known issues associated with a faulty hernia mesh implant:
A person may be eligible for a hernia mesh lawsuit if they have experienced significant complications, such as chronic pain, infections, or the need for additional surgeries, after receiving a hernia mesh implant. The hernia mesh lawsuit often aims to prove that these complications directly resulted from a defective hernia mesh product. Patients who believe they have been negatively impacted by a hernia mesh implant should consult with a legal professional to explore their options.
One key factor that makes a person eligible for a hernia mesh lawsuit is the extent and severity of the complications they have experienced. The complications must be serious and demonstrably linked to the hernia mesh settlement implant. Issues like chronic pain, organ perforation, or recurring infections that necessitate additional medical treatments and surgeries often strengthen a person’s eligibility for legal action.
Another crucial factor is the timeframe within which these complications occurred. Many jurisdictions have statutes of limitations that place a deadline on when a lawsuit can be filed. Acting promptly after experiencing complications is essential to meet these legal deadlines.
For hernia mesh victims, follow the steps below to file a lawsuit:
The potential compensation for hernia mesh lawsuits can range between $50,000 and $100,000, depending on the specifics of the case. These amounts are highly variable and are determined based on factors such as the severity of the hernia mesh complications, the cost of medical treatments, lost wages, and the emotional and physical suffering endured by the plaintiff.
Some high-profile cases have resulted in multimillion-dollar awards, especially when punitive damages are applied to punish the manufacturer for egregious misconduct. Smaller settlements are also common, particularly when the complications are less severe or have a minor impact on the plaintiff’s overall quality of life. How long it takes to get a hernia mesh settlement will vary depending on different factors.
Back in fall 2012, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) slapped Atrium, the company behind C-Qur hernia mesh, with a warning. They said Atrium needed to clean up their act regarding safety issues—like infections and cleanliness—that came with their hernia mesh devices. To make matters worse, 35 people found human hair in their mesh, yikes!
Fast forward to summer 2013, and Atrium had to pull the C-Qur mesh off the shelves. The reason? If it got too humid, the special coating on the mesh would stick to its wrapper. That could lead to even more infection risks when used in surgeries.
By winter 2015, the FDA had had enough. They took Atrium to court, accusing them of cutting corners on quality at their New Hampshire factory.
And don’t think it was just Atrium under the microscope. In summer 2016, Ethicon, another mesh maker, had to recall its Physiomesh. They admitted that patients were needing redo surgeries way too often because of problems with their product.
Judge Sargus has mandated that the parties convene on March 4 and March 5, 2024, to explore the possibility of reaching a settlement under the guidance of a Court-appointed mediator. Should the discussions reach an impasse, the parties are required to update the Court by May 24, 2024.
Covidien faces legal challenges, including nearly 900 hernia mesh lawsuits and a new lawsuit from Mallinckrodt creditors alleging fraudulent transfers and liabilities. In the hernia mesh multidistrict litigation, plaintiffs' attorneys seek expedited trials and a more efficient case management process to handle the over 20,000 pending cases against C.R. Bard.
As of December 2023, the fourth bellwether trial in the Bard hernia mesh lawsuit series is scheduled for April 8, 2024, focusing on Jacob Bryan from Florida. Bryan suffered severe complications from the Bard 3DMax hernia mesh, alleging that design flaws in the mesh led to its failure and necessitated surgical removal.
While setting a firm trial date is a positive step, the extended intervals between these trials could potentially weaken the plaintiffs' leverage in settlement negotiations. The concern is that these gaps might reduce the immediacy and pressure on the defendant to settle, allowing them more time to delay settlement decisions. However, there remains hope for a comprehensive hernia mesh settlement before the Bryan trial.
In a related development, Johnson & Johnson and its subsidiary Ethicon have settled 224 cases in a Georgia multidistrict litigation. The settlement, which was confirmed through a joint motion and approved by U.S. District Judge Richard W. Story, came with Ethicon Inc. emphasizing that they do not accept real responsibility for the issue, stating the decision was made to avoid a prolonged legal process. This settlement follows a similar resolution six months earlier, where the companies settled claims with 161 plaintiffs in MDL-2782, suggesting a pattern of resolving these cases through settlements rather than prolonged court battles.
The Bard hernia mesh multidistrict litigation (MDL) has grown to 20,768 plaintiffs, with 400 new cases added in the last month, reflecting ongoing legal challenges against Bard. The upcoming bellwether trial in January 2024 focuses on plaintiff Jacob Bryan, who suffered severe complications from Bard's 3DMax hernia mesh used in his groin hernia repair. The case highlights allegations against Bard for inadequate risk warnings and potential design and manufacturing defects in their hernia mesh products.
After the plaintiff concluded their arguments, the defense called Dr. Boris Pomerants, who testified that the plaintiff's long-term pain and a past assault could have exacerbated the post-operative pain issues, offering an alternative cause for the plaintiff's complaints. This testimony is central to the defense's case, which seeks to attribute the plaintiff's injuries to pre-existing conditions and past incidents.
The next key trial in the Bard hernia mesh multidistrict litigation, Stinson v. Davol, Inc., is scheduled to start on October 16, 2023. Another significant trial, Bryan v. C.R. Bard Inc., is planned for early 2024.
Despite a quiet August for the Bard hernia mesh MDL, 191 new cases were added that month. This brings the total case count to 20,126, making it the third largest MDL in the nation.
The key 3rd bellwether trial, Stinson v. C.R. Bard, is set to start on October 16, 2023. A recent court order outlines tight deadlines for discovery, indicating the judge’s commitment to avoid further delays.
As the 3rd bellwether trial approaches, 228 new cases have been transferred to the Bard hernia mesh implant MDL. This increases the total pending cases to 19,935, trailing only 3M earplugs and Talcum Powder MDLs in size.
The FDA released a new guide on hernia mesh surgery this week to help doctors and patients understand the risks and benefits of hernia mesh implants. These implants have been subject to debate due to complications.
The main focus of recent updates is the Stinson case, with the defense filing a motion for summary judgment. The plaintiff has until June 14, 2023, to respond.
Over the past month, 231 new lawsuits were added to the Bard MDL, increasing the total to 19,707. A total of 1,480 new cases have been added since the beginning of the year.
A Rhode Island judge partially reduced a disfigurement award but left $4.55 million intact. This ruling confirms that Bard could face liabilities under Rhode Island’s laws.
A hernia mesh lawsuit can take 3 to 7 years, depending on factors like the case’s complexity and court schedules. A quick settlement may last for a few years, but it can take longer if the case goes to trial and undergoes appeals.
Generally, you may have between 2 to 3 years from the date you discovered or reasonably should have discovered the injury to file a claim. The statute of limitations for filing a hernia mesh lawsuit differs by jurisdiction and the specifics of the case.
Hernia mesh lawsuits can be individual cases or part of a multidistrict litigation, consolidating similar cases for pre-trial proceedings but allowing for individual settlements or verdicts.
You can find an experienced attorney in hernia mesh lawsuits by filling out our contact form. Our team will quickly connect you with a specialized attorney. Let us assist you with your case.
