Hernia mesh lawsuits involve over 24,000 cases in the United States and have been ongoing for several years. Major actions against manufacturers like Bard and Covidien have been consolidated into Multi-District Litigations (MDLs) in 2018 and 2022. The allegations include inadequate design, manufacturing, and failure to warn patients about the risks associated with the hernia mesh devices. Patients with post-2010 hernia mesh implants from these major manufacturers represent about 80% of the market and may be eligible for compensation due to complications like infection, migration, adhesion, and hernia recurrence. Robert King, an experienced hernia mesh attorney, understands the importance of specialized legal help in these complex medical device cases. King Law is providing information, updates, and comprehensive hernia mesh case evaluations nationwide.
Judge Sargus has signed an order that now requires expert reports to be filed in the Bard Hernia Mesh MDL. Discovery is proceeding in the Covidien Hernia Mesh MDL, although the defense seems determined to delay document production as long as possible. Judge Sargus has also mentioned a global settlement agreement, although it is unclear if there is actually a global settlement in the Bard hernia mesh cases. It is worth noting that Judge Sargus signed his first case management order on August 17, 2018. The rule of thumb is about 5 years for a major federal court products liability lawsuit. This case is not much past the five-year mark. It is worth noting that the complexity of the hernia mesh lawsuit is that there are actually dozens of different hernia mesh products on the market. Each mesh product works differently, and the trial preparation for each product is very different. There have been several trials, most going the way of the plaintiff. We think there will be some major progress soon, but it is important to remember that Big Pharma companies continue to aggressively market dangerous products, including hernia mesh, and the lawsuits will continue.
The Bard hernia mesh lawsuit has reached a critical stage. A new case management order issued by the Court directs a “stay” or pause to any new discovery, depositions, motions, etc. The order further indicates that the stay may be lifted if an individual elects to opt out of the master settlement agreement. Notably, the Court has also directed that any future cases filed would require the attorney to certify that all claims and records are true and accurate and requires that the plaintiff submit an expert report showing that their injuries were caused by a Bard mesh product. This is sometimes called a “Lone Pine” order, which requires plaintiffs to show specific causation or risk dismissal of their case. This is important because it will add significant costs and burdens to any new cases.
The language of the order typically indicates that a master settlement agreement may be in the works. Based on this order, it is expected that we will know much more in the next few weeks.
The rumors of a settlement in the Bard hernia mesh lawsuit continue to swirl. With almost 24,000 cases, C.R. Bard has the most pending cases out of the four companies involved in this litigation. Although some law firms may have recently made settlements with Bard, cases are still being added to the litigation. June alone saw nearly 750 new pending Bard cases, and negotiations remain ongoing as firms across the country work to finalize this massive litigation.
The Bard hernia mesh lawsuit has been ongoing for nearly 6 years now. It officially became a Multi-District Litigation (MDL) lawsuit in August of 2018. The process to get a case approved as an MDL is years of work by itself. In reality, attorneys have been working on this case for a decade. We think the finish line is in sight. Some law firms see the writing on the wall and have even stopped taking Bard cases given the timeline and the complexity in building a case. We’re still taking cases – but it might not be for much longer.
The hernia mesh lawsuits have been eerily quiet for the past four weeks. There have been almost no filings in the Bard Hernia Mesh Lawsuit during this period. The Covidien Hernia Mesh Lawsuit seems to be in a typical period of argument regarding what discovery will be produced. Plaintiffs have been arguing that the production of documents by Covidien has been incomplete or insufficient. Defendants have even agreed with the plaintiff lawyers in some instances. The most recent status of the discovery disputes was outlined by the parties in the April 29, 2024, status report to the judge.
The Covidien Hernia Mesh Lawsuit has a new scheduling order. Case Management Order number 13, filed on April 8, 2024, extends the deadline for corporate discovery until December 9, 2024. The deadline to identify a plaintiff for the first of two cases to be tried is May 12, 2025. This order means that trials and any potential settlement are a long way off in the Covidien case. There has been a lot of discussion between the parties about whether the appropriate disclosures have been made by Covidien.
The Bard hernia mesh lawsuit may be poised for settlement. The final bellwether trial has been postponed indefinitely, and the court has ordered mediation. Case Management Order 51-A, signed by Judge Edmund Sargus, Jr. on February 29, 2024, ordered the Plaintiffs and Defense to attend a mediation for the purpose of settling the cases. The Order gives until May 24, 2024, for the parties to tell the Judge whether the parties have settled or come to an impasse. The judge also ordered that if there is an impasse, a plan for remanding cases to other courts must be submitted by June 24, 2024. The threat of remand is important leverage in favor of the hernia mesh plaintiffs. Remand means cases will be sent to the court where the case originated, which will be all across America. Remand is very expensive for the defense. The mediator is John Jackson.
On March 22, 2024, plaintiffs filed a motion to extend the discovery deadline in the Covidien hernia mesh lawsuit. A motion is simply a request of a judge to take action based on a lawyer’s understanding of the law. The motion in this mesh lawsuit is that the defendants have not produced all the documents in their possession regarding the hernia mesh in question in this lawsuit. Plaintiffs’ lawyers argue they need the documents, especially those related to Progrip mesh and Symbotex mesh. Magistrate Judge M. Page Kelley ordered the defense to respond by April 1, 2024. There will be a virtual hearing on April 8, 2024.
The Hernia Mesh lawsuits are at critical stages this spring. The bellwether trial in the Bard hernia mesh lawsuit was postponed. This is decision comes shortly after the Judge denied the Plaintiff’s motion to begin returning cases to district courts around the country. This window of relaxed litigation in the court room is viewed by many as the judge encouraging settlement. If cases are returned to district court defense costs will skyrocket. The Covidien hernia mesh litigation is picking up pace as well. Some Covidien cases have been filed in Massachusetts, some have been filed in Minnesota, and others have been filed in federal court. The federal court cases were consolidated as part of an MDL. Depositions have begun for the corporate witnesses being produced by the defendant, Covidien. Last week, the Plaintiff’s in the MDL made a Motion to Quash, including a request for sanctions against the Defendant, alleging they were not providing information that was required. The motion was granted, but the court reserved decision on the request for sanctions.
There will be no more trials in the Bard hernia mesh lawsuit case and there is a chance that all cases are remanded (or sent back) to their respective states for trial. Judge Sargus has ordered the parties to meet with the Court appointed mediator March 4 and March 5, 2024, to discuss the possibility of settlement. Should the parties reach an impasse, the judge has asked the parties to report the Court by May 24, 2024. It is certainly possible that these negotiations prove fruitful. However, we could be looking at further delays. This litigation has been going on for over 5 years and a resolution would be welcomed by the plaintiffs.
With the recent cancellation of the next hernia mesh trial, the window to file a hernia mesh lawsuit is closing quickly. Judge Sargus seems intent on getting this litigation over the finish line. Once lawyers settle their cases they are no longer permitted to accept new clients. If you have had hernia mesh surgery and have suffered complications such as infection, migration, perforation, or other serious conditions that required a follow up surgery, you should contact an attorney right away.
The judge overseeing the Bard Hernia Mesh lawsuits has issued an order denying the plaintiffs request to remand cases to local courts, and has cancelled the upcoming trial, Bryan v. C.R. Bard, Inc., et al. The court indicated its frustration at the pace of the litigation and settlement talks. The Court noted that it “has spent a total of 56 days in trial and has issued more than 100 opinions on dispositive motions and evidentiary issues in bellwether cases.” Judge Sargus went on to say “The usefulness of another lengthy and expensive trial is dubious at best.” It remains to be seen if this will jumpstart negotiations or add additional delays. One thing is for sure, the Court is done overseeing trials and wants the case settled.
As expected, Bard appealed the ruling in the most recent trial where a jury awarded plaintiff Aaron Stinson $500,000 for his injuries related to his hernia mesh implant. It is not surprise that Bard appealed, essentially resubmitting its motion for summary judgement to the trial judge. Bard will certainly exhaust all appeal options available to them. There is no reason to believe any will be granted. The next, and likely final, Bard Hernia Mesh trial is scheduled for April, 2024.
Judge Edmund Sargus, who is overseeing the Bard Hernia Mesh lawsuits, has scheduled the next status conference for February 6th, at 1:30pm. After 3 trials, the big issue at hand is how cases will be handled moving forward. A motion by the plaintiff’s has been made to remand cases back to their local jurisdictions for discovery and trials. This may be designed to put some pressure on the defendant to settle. The next, and likely last, Bard hernia mesh MDL trial is currently scheduled to take place in April of 2024. The plaintiff’s remain frustrated with the pace of the lawsuit and the delays by the defendant’s. Everyone involved had hoped that there would be a settlement by now after 5 years of litigation. All possibilities are still on the table, including a settlement before the April trial, a settlement after the trial, and even the chance that cases could be sent back to local courts. One thing is clear, however, we should finally have some clarity here in the next few months.
The Bard Hernia Mesh lawsuit has been going on for over 5 years with more than 20,000 cases filed in the Multi District Litigation (MDL). An MDL consolidates all cases from around the country into one federal court for purposes of efficiency and cost savings to all parties. After 3 bellwether trials (test trials) with the 4th scheduled for the Spring of 2024, and no settlement offer having been made by Bard, lawyers for the Plaintiff’s have filed a motion to remand (or send back) all cases to individual federal district courts for trial. This strategy may be designed to put some pressure on the defendant to settle. Although there is the idea of holding trials in groups, practically speaking, if all cases were sent back to individual districts and each case had its own trial, it would literally take hundred’s of years to resolve them all. While it remains likely that the cases will settle globally in the MDL, it is certainly possible that all cases could end back in individual courts for trial. Should that become the case, plaintiff’s should hope that the lawyer they hired has trial experience.
December 2023Attorney’s selected as part of the leadership team for the Plaintiff’s in the Covidien Hernia Mesh lawsuit continue their review of the more than 1 million documents supplied by the defendant as part of the discovery process, where parties are required to share information. The company has been bought and sold several times making the process even more cumbersome. Robert King, the lead Covidien Hernia Mesh lawyer in our firm is one of just 10 attorney’s in the county to be part of this leadership as a member of the plaintiff’s steering committee.
After a jury awarded Aaron Stinson $500,000 in his lawsuit against Bard, alleging the hernia mesh implant used cased severe injuries, there was speculation that Bard would soon settle the remaining cases. This “class-action” style hernia mesh lawsuit, officially known as an MDL, or Multi-District Litigation, has seen an additional 500 cases filed in the last month, growing to more than 21,000. Should a settlement resolution not be reached in the next few months, the next bellwether trial (or test case) will take place in April 2024. The Plaintiff, Jacob Bryan, is suing Bard for injuries he sustained after being implanted with a 3DMax Hernia Mesh. A significant award by a jury in this case could go a long way in increasing the value of the the cases for the remaining plaintiff’s. A ruling for the defendant could complicate matters and result in lower settlement offers. With the trial still 4 months away, a global settlement is still possible before then.
November 2023After the latest bellwether trial resulted in a $500,000 verdict for the Plaintiff, the class-action MDL (which houses the majority of the cases) is set for a status conference on January 16, 2024. While the case is not technically a “class-action” it does share many similarities. The conference will likely discuss the next steps for the case, including the possibility of a global settlement, of the need for another bellwether trial. The defendant (C.R. Bard) and lawyers for the Plaintiff’s will be present to give Judge Sargus an update on the possible direction and next steps.
A verdict has been reached in the much anticipated Bard Hernia Mesh Trial. Plaintiff Aaron Stinson made several claims, all of which the jury ruled on today. The jury’s verdicts on each claim are as follows:
1. Do you find in favor of Plaintiff on his Strict Products Liability – Design Defect claim
against Defendants? NO
2. Do you find in favor of Plaintiff on his Strict Liability—Failure to Warn claim against
Defendants? YES
3. Do you find in favor of Plaintiff on his Negligence claim against Defendants? YES
4. Do you find in favor of Plaintiff on his Negligence claim for Design Defect? NO
5. Do you find that Plaintiff has proven by clear and convincing evidence that Defendants acted with malice, which was a substantial cause of injury to Plaintiff? NO
Ultimately there the jury awarded $500,000 to Stinson. In terms of the litigation at large, it is a victory for the plaintiff.
Both parties are expected to appeal. What does this mean for the rest of the plaintiff’s who have (or will) file a lawsuit against Bard? There remains one more bellwether trial scheduled for January. It remains to be seen if Bard will settle after the Stinson trial or if they will choose to move forward with the final trial. For now, those that may have a potential claim against Bard, there is still time to file a lawsuit. However, with the completion of this trial, that window is closing quickly.
After 15 days of testimony in the Bard Hernia Mesh Trial (Stinson v. C.R. Bard), a jury is expected to announce a verdict at any moment. Parties have used their 35 hours of trial time and proof closed at noon yesterday. No further evidence will be presented. A Motion for Judgement as a Matter of Law was filed in the case asking the judge to make a ruling. The Plaintiff and Defendant met with the judge for a charge conference where they will request instructions to be read to the jury. The judge will consider each parties request and will make the final decision on jury instructions. Each party will have an opportunity to present a closing statement. This is their opportunity to make an argument to the jury as to how they believe they should view the evidence presented in the hernia mesh trial. After closing statements, the judge will instruct the jury regarding the law in this case. The jury will then be sequestered until they reach a verdict.
After more than two weeks, the Bard Hernia Mesh Trial is still ongoing. Witnesses and experts continue to be called questioned. However, the Plaintiff (Aaron Stinson) and the Defendant (Bard Davol) filed a joint brief asking the court to use a single verdict form for damages, as required under Maine law. The brief highlights that asking a jury to award and calculate damages on multiple counts could be confusing and labor intensive. This process would also help to avoid the potential for appeals in the case. The results of the trial will have a major impact on the next steps for people injured by Bard Hernia Mesh products. A victory for the plaintiff will likely drive higher settlement amounts. The outcome will also impact other hernia mesh litigation, such as the Covidien brand cases, which are just in the discovery phase.
October 2023The long awaited Bard Hernia Mesh Trial is underway. The third bellwether trial, Stinson v. CR Bard, started yesterday. This trial is critical for plaintiffs and defendants in every hernia mesh litigation in the United States. The first trial verdict was for the defense, but since then Bard has taken two verdicts. In those cases the jury has found that the hernia mesh was defectively designed and caused injury to the plaintiff. A third consecutive verdict will increase the likelihood of a settlement in the Bard MDL as well as other hernia mesh cases.
Yesterday the trial moved at rocket speed. After years of waiting for a trial date and seemingly countless delays and legal arguments the Judge Sargus wasted no time. Preliminary comments were made by the judge at 9:00am. A jury of eight (6 jurors and two alternates) was seated by lunch time. (See trial notes) This is incredible efficiency. These are the people that could award millions of dollars to the plaintiffs and each member of the jury panel would have been questioned for only a few minutes. After lunch, both sides gave their opening statements. The plaintiff told the jury that this product was not safely designed and the manufacturer, Bard, knew it. The defense states that any injury was not caused by the mesh, but by some other means unique to this doctor, or plaintiff himself. A large verdict here would make the remaining cases more valuable, while a defense verdict would make the remaining cases less valuable.
People involved in lawsuits often wonder what takes so long. It is common for a national litigation or “MDL” to last 5 or more years. The Bard hernia Mesh lawsuit is now over five years old. The Covidien Hernia Mesh lawsuit in federal court is now over a year old and there has not been any testimony taken from any witnesses. The MDL system is actually designed for efficiency, but doesn’t always feel like it. There are several rounds of negotiations and applications to the judge just about how the information will be exchanged between the parties, let alone actual arguments and trials. There are schedules set, and often times changed, because of “unforeseen circumstances.” In almost every case there are over a million documents to review. The Covidien hernia mesh case is no exception. There are at least 1.3 million documents provided by Medtronic, the parent company of Covidien. The Plaintiff’s Steering Committee or “PSC” is in the process of reviewing this extensive evidence. It is anticipated that they will further show that Covidien’s hernia mesh’s were defective and caused tremendous injury to many people that were implanted with this medical device.
The third, and possibly final, bellwether trial (or test case) in the Bard Hernia Mesh lawsuit is scheduled to begin in approximately 10 days. There have been a significant number of motions recently filed in the last month as both sides prepare for trial. The results of this trial will likely solidify future settlement offers as the sides continue to negotiate a resolution. It is still possible that a global settlement is reached prior to the start of the trial. One thing is for sure, the finish line is now in sight. There are currently more than 20,000 lawsuits filed in the Bard Hernia Mesh Multi-District Litigation (MDL), which some refer to as the Bard Class Action Lawsuit.
September 2023The federal court overseeing the Covidien Hernia Mesh lawsuits in the District of Massachusetts, approved the appointment of lawyers to serve on the Plaintiff’s Leadership Counsel (PLC). Robert King was appointed as part of the Plaintiff’s Steering Committee. Attorney’s selected in leadership roles are tasked with representing the interests of all plaintiff’s who have filed lawsuits. Leadership is responsible for overall litigation strategy, coordination with the court and experts, discovery management, settlement negotiations, trial preparation, and more.
King is one of only 10 lawyers from around the country to be chosen to manage this uniquely complex lawsuit. He joins a highly qualified and respected group of national litigators set to advocate on behalf of all victims of defective Covidien Hernia Mesh products.
A major step forward in the Bard Hernia Mesh Lawsuit is set to take place when the third bellwether trial, Stinson v. Davol, Inc., et al. (18-cv-1022), takes place on October 16, 2023. Some refer to these cases as the Bard Hernia Mesh Class Action lawsuit. While similar to a class action lawsuit, it does differ in some ways, mainly because the facts of each plaintiff’s case remain unique, and attorney’s are able to negotiate settlements for each case individually. The trial was delayed while the plaintiff required a new surgery. Bard had made a motion to disqualify Stinson from the bellwether pool because his injuries were so severe that he no longer represented the majority of the lawsuits filed in the hernia mesh case. The judge overseeing the case, denied the motion, and the trial is expected to move forward as scheduled. The results of this trial will significantly impact the next stages including possible global settlement resolution.
August 2023On August 10, 2023, lead counsel for the plaintiffs in the Covidien Hernia Mesh lawsuits, filed a proposed order which would a appoint a leadership committee in the case. In a multi-district litigation case (MDL) the leadership committee consists of experienced attorney’s who act as liaisons between the plaintiffs and the court and are charged with presenting legal arguments, engaging in the discovery process of gathering evidence, negotiating with the defendant and otherwise representing the interests of all plaintiffs in the matter. The judge is expected to rule on the proposed order soon.
July marked a milestone in the Bard Hernia Mesh Lawsuit as the MDL reached 20,000 cases. In just over two months from now, the third bellwether trial (Stinson v. C.R. Bard) will take place. The results of this trial are expected to be critical to the next stage, including possible settlement. The next status update is scheduled for August 29. 2023.
July 2023As a law firm we know how much damage hernia mesh can cause. The FDA just released a GUIDE outlining the benefits and many risks associated with hernia mesh. It is important for anyone considering hernia surgery to be fully aware of the risks involved.
The Third Bellwether trial in the Bard Hernia Mesh Lawsuit, Stinson v. Bard, is scheduled for October 2023. The trial was delayed in May because the plaintiff needed additional surgery to treat the hernia. The case had been selected as a trial after negotiations between the plaintiff and defense. Following the adjournment the defense filed a motion asking that the case not be tried and another substituted in it’s place. The defense argued that the subsequent surgery from 2023 changed the case so it was not an appropriate test case and not representative of the majority of other cases. The plaintiff and their attorneys seem confident that they can show the Bard Perfix Plug caused the injury, including removal of the Plaintiff’s testicle and spermatic cord. The additional surgery might be viewed as a windfall for the plaintiff, and perhaps all of the plaintiff’s in this case. The complaint originally filed in this case alleged only pain, which was a common complaint in the Bard Hernia Mesh Lawsuits. The increased level of injury makes a higher verdict more likely, as the jury can award damages for pain and suffering, which are certainly increased both now and in the future with this additional surgery. A higher verdict in this case will also likely lead to higher settlement values for other cases that get settled later. The judge denied the defense request for a different case to take the place of Stinson. This should be viewed as a victory for the Plaintiffs and a defeat for the Bard defense. The motion also illustrates the aggressive nature in which the case is being litigated. The defense has made motion after motion, which have largely been denied by the judge. The most aggressive defense motion came last year when the Bard defense filed a motion, which would have required expert review prior to any new case being filed. That motion was also denied.
The Covidien Hernia Mesh Lawsuit is accelerating. Last week the parties met with Judge Saris for “Science Day”. Several of the attorneys that appeared are also active in the Bard hernia mesh case. Science day is the day where the lawyers can brief the judge on complex scientific issues they anticipate coming before the Court in the future. In the Covidien case each side was given two hours to present. The number of Covidien cases filed has accelerated in the past few months. The Judge also anticipates cases that were previously filed in the State of Massachusetts being added to the Covidien MDL. We expect that a further acceleration of complaints to be filed against Covidien. We also anticipate a other attorneys being appointed to the Plaintiff Steering Committee and an the beginning stages of discovery. Discovery is the formal exchange of information between the parties.
U.S. District Court Judge Patti B. Saris, who is overseeing the case regarding Hernia Mesh products manufactured by Covidien, has set a “Evidentiary/Science Day” to be held June 14, 2023 at 2:30pm. It is anticipated that this conference will provide the judge with a scientific background on what is a detailed and complicated set of medical facts regarding hernia mesh. Approximately one year ago, in June of 2022, all Covidien Hernia Mesh cases were consolidated into a multi-district litigation (MDL) in the District of Massachusetts federal court for purposes of streamlining and simplifying the litigation process for the nearly 500 cases from around the country.
As the 3rd and 4th bellwether trials approach, currently scheduled for October of 2023, and January of 2024, Bard is requesting a federal judge to replace those two trials with new plaintiffs. The company, which manufactures several hernia mesh products facing lawsuits, claims that the plantiffs’ conditions in those cases have worsened to the point at which they are no longer representative of the thousands of other pending lawsuits. There are currently more than 18,000 lawsuits pending against Bard, which have been consolidated into a multi-district litigation (MDL) in the Southern District of Ohio. The bellwether cases, or test trials, are used to provide insight into how juries might respond to testimony and evidence presented in hernia mesh trials. The outcomes of the bellwether trials could influence the settlement amounts for the remaining claims. The next case management conference in the matter is scheduled for June 13, 2023, before District Judge Edmund A. Sargus.
Lawyers representing the plaintiffs in the hernia mesh litigation continue with their rigorous preparations for the forthcoming bellwether trial: Stinson v. Bard. This trial, slated for October, has the potential to be the most monumental hernia mesh litigation to date. A triumph for the plaintiffs would signify their third consecutive victory following the jury’s determination that Bard was culpable for defective design of the hernia mesh in the preceding bellwether trial, Milanesi v. Bard. The scale of potential litigation against the leading hernia mesh manufacturer appears to be on the cusp of substantial growth, particularly given the swiftly rendered $4.8 million verdict against Bard in the Rhode Island state court that succeeded the second bellwether trial. The scheduled trial was adjourned to unforeseen medical complications encountered by the plaintiff, necessitating further examination and inquiry by the defense before proceeding to trial. Contrary to circulating speculation, there seems to be no immediate indication of an impending settlement. If the plaintiffs secure another substantial verdict, it may effectively diminish the defense’s prospects of victory, while potentially inflating the future settlement figures associated with hernia mesh cases. Conversely, a defense verdict could engender further delay due to the resultant uncertainty in predicting future outcomes, potentially necessitating additional trials. In the eventuality of the aforementioned scenario, the fourth and final bellwether trial has been earmarked for January 2024. Should a settlement remain elusive following the conclusion of the fourth bellwether trial, the hernia mesh cases will be reassigned to their original jurisdiction to proceed towards trial.
A standardized Plaintiff Fact Sheet has been approved by an order issued by the US District Judge presiding over lawsuits against Covidien’s hernia mesh products. The lawsuits are being filed against Covidien and their parent company Medtronic over allegations that the products were faulty or defective and caused serious medical complications such as organ damage, severe pain, infections, and re-occurrences of hernias. These issues often required additional repair or revision surgeries.
In June 2022 all Covidien hernia mesh lawsuits were consolidated and transferred to U.S. District Judge Patti B. Saris in Massachusetts. The Court will choose a group of Covidien Hernia mesh lawsuit cases to be heard as “Bellwether” trials. These are test cases in which important legal issues are worked out, in turn guiding future trials and settlements. Covidien is just one of several companies facing hernia mesh lawsuits including C.R. Bard, Johnson & Johnson, and others.
It is widely believed that the Third Bellwether trial currently scheduled for October, 2023, may settle prior to trial. This is leading to speculation that a global settlement may not be far off, giving potential plaintiffs a limited amount of time to become part of the lawsuit.
The date for the 3rd bellwether trail in Stinson v. C.R. Bard has be rescheduled to October 16, 2023. Originally calendared for May of 2023, the request by the defense for Bard (the manufacturer of the hernia mesh) was granted by Judge Sargus. While the trial has been entered into the Courts’ calendar, there remains speculation that a settlement may be reached prior to the trial. The projected settlement amounts still remain somewhat of a mystery as the first two bellwether trials resulted in vastly different outcomes with jury awards ranging from $250,000 to $4.8 million. We expect that settlement amounts may fall between $50,000 to $1,000,000 depending on individual factors including the severity of the injuries resulting from the hernia mesh failure.
The third test case or “bellwether trial” in the MDL concerning hernia mesh manufactured by C.R. Bard has been delayed. Initially scheduled for May 15, 2023, the trial of Stinson v. C.R. Bard was intended to serve as the third test case. The judge recently denied a motion by the defense, thereby allowing the Stinson case to move forward. Despite this, the defense team for Bard requested a postponement of the trial, which was granted by the judge just days after. No new date has been set, however there is speculation that a settlement may be reached soon.
Over 18,000 lawsuits involving Bard hernia mesh are being presided over by U.S. District Judge Edmund A. Sargus, who has announced that a third case will be presented to a federal jury on May 15, 2023. This comes after the first two bellwether trials, which were intended to gauge how juries would react to certain evidence and testimony, produced mixed results. The lawsuits all make similar allegations against C.R. Bard, claiming that the company sold polypropylene mesh products that were defective and increased the risk of complications after hernia surgery. Some of the mesh systems identified by the plaintiffs include Bard Ventralight, Bard Ventralex, Bard Perfix, Bard 3DMax, and others.
According to the plaintiffs, the mesh failed, leading to a host of complications, including severe abdominal pain, infections, and more. In many cases the patients needed to have the devices removed causing additional pain and suffering
Hernia mesh lawsuits are legal claims filed by patients suffering the consequences of defective hernia mesh implants. Hernia mesh lawsuits are filed against the manufacturers of surgical mesh and/or healthcare providers.
Patients’ attorneys argue that many hernia mesh products have design defects and are causing injuries and resulting in additional surgeries that would not have been necessary if a different product had been used or a different course of action had been taken. The faulty hernia mesh products have been seen to shrink, migrate, break, or reject, resulting in acute or chronic pain, infections, nerve damage, bowel obstruction, impotence, and other serious conditions, which led patients to file mesh hernia lawsuits.
The manufacturers being sued include Ethicon (a Johnson & Johnson subsidiary), Bard (formerly known as C.R. Bard, owned by Becton Dickinson), Covidien (owned by Medtronic), Gore Medical (part of W. L. Gore & Associates, Inc ) , Genzyme (owned by Sanofi) and Atrium Medical Corporation.
Your legal options for a hernia mesh case will vary depending on the specifics of your situation and who is responsible for your condition. It is natural to have questions. An experienced personal injury lawyer will be able to establish if you qualify for a lawsuit and guide you through every step of the process.
