Nearly 13,000 lawsuits have been filed throughout the federal court system involving problems with transvaginal surgical mesh.

According to an updated case list (PDF) released by the U.S. JPML on May 15, Judge Goodwin is currently presiding over 2,938 claims involving products manufactured by C.R. Bard, Inc., 6,028 claims against AMS, 5,763 claims against Johnson & Johnson’s Ethicon subsidiary, 3,557 claims against Boston Scientific and 320 claim against Coloplast Corp.

The litigation has increased dramatically over the past two years, following an FDA warning issued in July 2011 about adverse event reports submitted to the agency involving complications from the products. After a review of all available data, the FDA concluded that there was no evidence that transvaginal mesh provides any additional benefits when compared to more traditional surgery for treatment of pelvic organ prolapse.

While the Cook Medical surgical mesh MDL has just been established, the other proceedings before Judge Goodwin are at a more advanced stage, with several cases scheduled to go to trial over the next year.

A series “bellwether” trials are scheduled to begin in July 2013 involving four cases brought by women who experienced problems with Bard Avaulta mesh. Another series of at least three trials are expected to begin later this year or early next year involving lawsuits over products manufactured by AMS, Ethicon and Boston Scientific.

At least two state court cases have already reached a jury, with each resulting in a multi-million dollar damage award for plaintiffs who received the products. In July 2012, a California state court awarded $5.5 million in damages for Bard Avaulta mesh that caused a woman to require multiple follow up surgeries. In February, a New Jersey state court jury awarded $11.1 million in compensatory and punitive damages for problems with Ethicon’s Gynecare Prolift mesh.

These early test cases are designed to help the parties gauge how juries are likely to respond to similar evidence and testimony that will be offered throughout the litigation and may help facilitate vaginal mesh settlement agreements.

The post Vaginal Mesh Lawsuit Update appeared first on Vaginal Mesh Helpline.

A panel of federal judges has agreed to consolidate all Cook Medical surgical mesh lawsuits filed in U.S. District Courts throughout the country as part of a multidistrict litigation (MDL) in West Virginia, centralizing the litigation before the same judge who is presiding over five other MDLs established for transvaginal mesh lawsuits filed against other manufacturers.

According to a transfer order (PDF) issued by the U.S. Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation (JPML) on June 11, complaints filed involving any Cook vaginal mesh products will be transferred to U.S. District Judge Joseph R. Goodwin in the Southern District of West Virginia for coordinated handling during pretrial proceedings.

This will be the sixth consolidated proceeding assigned to Judge Goodwin, who is already managing MDLs previously established for all Bard Avaulta mesh lawsuits, American Medical System (AMS) mesh lawsuits, Ethicon Gynecare mesh lawsuits, Boston Scientific pelvic mesh lawsuits and Coloplast sling lawsuits.

In the federal court system, it is common for complex product liability lawsuits involving a large number of similar claims to be centralized as part of an MDL to reduce duplicative discovery, avoid conflicting pretrial rulings from different judges and to serve the convenience of the parties, witnesses and the courts.

All of the claims raise similar allegations that women experienced painful injuries and complications after receiving surgical mesh transvaginally to repair pelvic organ prolapse or female stress urinary incontinence. The plaintiffs claim that the mesh has eroded through the vagina, caused infections and other debilitating health problems, alleging that the manufacturers failed to adequately research the design or warn about the risk of complications.

Cook Medical Mesh MDL

A group of plaintiffs filed a motion to establish the Cook mesh MDL in February, asking for centralized proceedings for all lawsuits involving Cook Medical’s Surgisis Biodesign Tension-Free Urethral Sling, Surgisis Biodesign Anterior Pelvic Floor Graft, Surgisis Biodesign Posterior Pelvic Floor Graft, Cook Urological Stratasis Urethral Sling or Stratasis Tension Free Urethral Sling.

In a response filed in April, Cook Biotech and other subsidiaries of Cook Medical indicated that the manufacturer opposed consolidating the cases as part of an MDL, maintaining that their products are different from those involved in the other transvaginal mesh litigation centralized before Judge Goodwin. Cook surgical mesh products are made from the small intestines of pigs, as opposed to the synthetic materials used in other products.

Following oral arguments heard on May 30, the U.S. JPML decided that the lawsuits do involve common questions of fact and that centralization in the Southern District of West Virginia was appropriate to promote the just and efficient conduct of the litigation.

“Regardless of whether the Cook products are “pelvic mesh” like the products at issue in the MDLs in West Virginia, there will be overlapping discovery and pretrial proceedings as to the claims against Cook, which are fairly typical of the claims involved in the West Virginia pelvic mesh MDLs,” wrote Judge John G. Heyburn II, Chairman of the Panel on Multidistrict Litigation. “Whether Cook’s products are more or less likely to cause injury than those manufactured by other defendant groups is a question of liability more appropriately addressed to the court which oversees those claims.”

The JPML identified at least 13 complaints filed in eight different districts that will be transferred to the MDL. However, as lawyers file additional cases against Cook Medical throughout the federal court system, they will be transferred to Judge Goodwin for coordinated handling.

The post Cook Medical Surgical vaginal Mesh Lawsuit Lawyers appeared first on Vaginal Mesh Helpline.

Lawsuits for Coloplast Slings Must Be Filed Right Away

The vaginal mesh products manufactured by Coloplast Corp. have had all the complications:

Erosion, of the mesh into the vaginal canal

Constant Infection

Lower back pain

Digestive problems

Severe relentless pain

Leg pain

Bleeding

Increased  incontinence

Prolapse back

Bowel problems

Pain During Sexual Intercourse

COLOPLAST ARIS, NOVASILK, RESTORELLE VAGINAL MESH LAWYERS

Coloplast Mesh Lawsuits  are being filed by Coloplast Mesh Lawyers

Novasilk Synthetic Flat Mesh

Restorelle Smartmesh

Exair Mesh

Aris Transobturator (TOT) Sling

Minitape Sling

Omnisure Sling

Supris Suprapubic Sling

T-Sling with Centrasorb

Call for a Coloplast vaginal mesh lawyer

The post Calling All Coloplast Vaginal Mesh Victims, Coloplast Vaginal Mesh Lawyer appeared first on Vaginal Mesh Helpline.

Rejecting a vaginal mesh lawsuit on strict criteria often shows a lack of understanding of the actual issues in the medical community regarding the mesh. We have heard some pretty startling comments from physicians to their patients.

Our vaginal mesh lawyers must keep the cases they sign up and not refer them out to another law firm and simply take a percentage or referral fee off the top. Of course, we realize that all vaginal mesh lawsuits will be referred to the appropriate MDL for that manufacturer lead counsels then take over the litigation process. But, that is part of a multi district litigation process. There are just too many lawsuits for every single lawyer to walk into court. The multi district litigation process streamlines things. Right now most manufacturers vaginal mesh lawsuits are filed in West Virginia under Judge Goodwin.

Because of their support of women going thru such a horrific condition, their understanding of the need for both a doctor and a lawyer to make the vaginal lawsuit a woman is filing work they have become the vaginal mesh lawyer and doctor source nationwide.

The post Vaginal Mesh Helpline,Your Source For A Vaginal Mesh Lawyer appeared first on Vaginal Mesh Helpline.

What Are The Basis Of The Vaginal Mesh Lawsuits

Specific causes of action for the vaginal mesh lawsuits include:

Strict products liability – failure to warn

Product liability is the area of law in which the vaginal mesh  manufacturers  who make medical and surgical products available to the public are held responsible for the injuries those products cause.

Vaginal mesh victims claim that manufacturers failed to adequately warn the public of potential side effects and complications.

Strict products liability – design defect

Design defects occur where the product design is inherently dangerous and defective and the risks of the product outweigh its benefits. Under strict liability the manufacturer is liable if the product is defective, even if the manufacturer was not negligent in making that product defective.

Manufacturer Negligence

A claim in negligence is based on the assumption that the manufacturer owes a duty of care to all those who can reasonably be expected to make use of its product. In the case of ‘dangerous’ products such as those which, if defective, could cause extensive harm this duty may be owed to anybody who may reasonably be affected by a defect in the product.

Manufacturer Breach of implied warranty

Every time goods are bought and sold, a sales contract is created

Manufacturer Breach of express warranty

An express warranty is a verbal or written statement that guarantees that a product is of a certain quality or will work in a certain way or for a certain amount of time.

Manufacturer Deceit by concealment

Whether by words or by conduct, by false or misleading allegations, or by concealment of what should have been disclosed.  The manufacturers deceived and  intended to deceive  the women so that they  will act upon it.

Negligent misrepresentation

A manufacturer of a product  did not directly lie (say something you KNOW to be false), but made a representation about then mesh  while having no reasonable reasons for believing it to be true.

The post Understanding The Legal Aspects Of Your Vaginal Mesh Lawsuit appeared first on Vaginal Mesh Helpline.

On June 4, Judge Goodwin denied vaginal mesh manufacturer C.R. Bard’s motion for partial summary judgment of four plaintiffs’ punitive damages claims, according to court documents in MDL No. 2187, U.S. District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia.

vaginal mesh manufacturers in West Virginia federal court

MDL No. 2187 (against C.R. Bard),

MDL No. 2387 (against Coloplast),

MDL No. 2326 (against Boston Scientific),

MDL No. 2327 (against Ethicon)

MDL No. 2325 (against American Medical Systems).

On  June 4 Judge Goodwin  decided on motions brought by both parties in the first four cases scheduled for trial in the MDL against C.R. Bard (MDL No. 2187).

Among the motions Judge Goodwin decided was C.R. Bard’s motion for summary judgment–i.e., motion for pre-trial judgment in Bard’s favor–on the first four cases’ punitive damages claims. Judge Goodwin denied that Bard motion for summary judgment on the unitive damages claims, according to court documents.

The first four cases in the MDL against Bard won’t be going to trial until July.  There has already  been a verdict in a vaginal mesh injury case brought against Bard in another jurisdiction. In July 2012, a California Superior Court jury awarded $5 million to Christine Scott for injuries caused by Bard’s Avaulta mesh, and $500,000 to her husband for his loss of consortium (Scott vs Kannappan, Cause Number S-1500-CV-266034).

The post New News In the Vaginal Mesh Lawsuits, Vaginal Mesh Lawyers Alert appeared first on Vaginal Mesh Helpline.

Bard Vaginal Mesh Lawyers On the Bard Vaginal Mesh Lawsuits MDL. – 2187

Judge Joseph R.  Goodwin,  overseeing thousands of vaginal mesh lawsuits in U.S. District Court, Southern District of West Virginia, has refused to dismiss punitive damage claims in four bellwether cases in the C.R. Bard vaginal mesh lawsuits. According to the June 4th Order, attorneys for C.R. Bard had filed a motion to dismiss  vaginal mesh lawsuit, arguing, because  C.R Bard had provided a warning in the instructions for use provided with its Avaulta mesh products. However, U .S. District Judge Joseph R. Goodwin disagreed, writing that simply including such a warning with a product does not absolve the manufacturer of potential punitive damage liability. (In re: C.R. Bard, Inc., Pelvic Repair Systems Products Liability Litigation – MDL No. 2187)

Boston Scientific Vaginal Mesh Lawyers On The Boston Scientific Vaginal Mesh Lawsuits

Boston Scientific vaginal mesh lawyers alert to an interesting new development in the Boston Scientific vaginal mesh lawsuits.

Boston Scientific has launched  a study that will investigate whether its latest vaginal mesh device is more beneficial in treating women with pelvic organ prolapse than traditional surgery, and is successful in avoiding complications  that have been the basis for  mesh lawsuit claims.

Bard has teamed up with the Pelvic Floor Disorders Network. The  researchers will evaluate patients who received its Uphold LITE transvaginal mesh implant every 6 months to gauge information on patient safety, surgical success, cost-effectiveness, body image and overall quality of life for up to 5 years, according to a report published June 3rd on Boston Scientific’s website.  The results are expected in in 2017. Does this mean they expect the lawsuits to last that long?

American Medical Systems Vaginal Mesh Lawyers On The AMS Vaginal Mesh Lawsuits

Lawsuits involving AMS Elevate, Perigee and Apogee vaginal mesh products were consolidated in the Superior Court for the State of Delaware, New Castle before Honorable Mary Johnston.

Hundreds of lawsuits against vaginal mesh manufacturer AMS  have been consolidated  under U.S. District Judge Joseph R. Goodwin , AMS (MDL 2325).   The trials are  scheduled to start on February 5, 2013.

Ethicon Vaginal Mesh Lawyers On The Ethicon Vaginal Mesh Lawsuits

Ethicon (MDL 2327),

In the second ruling involving cases against Ethicon, Inc. the company was ordered to make a witness available to testify about the company’s “Standard Operating Procedures” about each of five products cited in the lawsuits.

Ethicon, Inc. attorneys had objected to the “scope and breadth of the topic” sought by plaintiffs lawyers but were overruled.

The post Vaginal Mesh Lawyers Alert You To Vaginal Mesh Lawsuit Updates appeared first on Vaginal Mesh Helpline.

Vaginal mesh lawsuits continue to mount up in as women pursue compensation for  the severe complications of a failed vaginal mesh. The vaginal mesh has has caused 1000′s of women to have  complications that have destroyed lives and impacted health, lifestyle, the capacity to earn a living and even destroyed marriages.

There are  five MDLs vaginal mesh lawyers are filing lawsuits in: In Re: American Medical Systems, Inc., Pelvic Repair Systems Products Liability Litigation, MDL No. 2325; In Re: Boston Scientific Corp., Pelvic Repair Systems Products Liability Litigation, MDL No. 2326; In Re: C.R. Bard, Inc., Pelvic Repair Systems Products Liability Litigation, MDL No. 2187; and In Re: Ethicon, Inc., Pelvic Repair Systems Products Liability Litigation, MDL No. 2327.

Over  30 manufacturers of  Prolene mesh products have been  ordered  by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to undertake post-market testing to further study the safety and efficacy of TVT sling surgery using transvaginal mesh.  The Vaginal Mesh Helpline receives calls every day from suffering women. We listen and wait for justice to be served.

The post Vaginal Mesh Lawsuit Bellwether Trial June 11, Vaginal Mesh Lawyers Watching appeared first on Vaginal Mesh Helpline.

Bard  Has Limited The  Plaintiffs’ Expert Testimony In  The Vaginal Mesh MDL Lawsuit

MDL No. 2187 | In RE: CR Bard, Inc., Pelvic Repair System Products Liability Litigation

C.R. Bard’s products include:

• Bard Pelvitex
• Bard Pelvisoft
• Bard Pelvilace or Pelvicol
• Bard Utrtex
• Bard Uretex TO
• Bard Uretex TOO2
• Bard Uretex TOO3

Law360, New York (June 06, 2013, 8:08 PM ET) — A West Virginia federal judge on Tuesday excluded or limited the testimony of the plaintiffs’ experts targeted by C.R. Bard Inc. in four bellwether cases in multidistrict litigation over injuries allegedly caused by the company’s vaginal mesh products.

U.S. District Judge Joseph Goodwin also granted a substantial portion of Bard’s motions for partial summary judgment as to the plaintiffs’ claims in the four cases. The bellwethers are scheduled to go to trial July 8.

The post New News For The Bard Vaginal Mesh Lawsuits appeared first on Vaginal Mesh Helpline.

Cook Medical Products  is  currently  defending more than 40 lawsuits involving its Surgisis and Stratasis vaginal mesh slings. On February 18, 2013, victims requested a motion for transfer of all federal cases to the vaginal mesh MDL. On March 13, 2013, Cook Medical submitted a response opposing  the consolidation.

Cook Vaginal Mesh Products

• Surgisis Biodesign mesh lawsuits,
• Stratasis mesh lawsuits

 Cook Vaginal Mesh

• Surgisis Biodesign Tension-Free Urethral Sling
• Surgisis Biodesign Anterior Pelvic Floor Graft
• Surgisis Biodesign Posterior Pelvic Floor Graft
• Cook Urological Stratasis Urethral Sling
• Stratasis Tension Free Urethral Sling

The post New Vaginal Mesh May be Added To The MDL, Cook Medical Products Vaginal Mesh appeared first on Vaginal Mesh Helpline.