Power Morcellator MDL Could Yield Big Damages, Lawyers Say
On the heels of warnings from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration about the risks of using power morcellators in uterine surgery, the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation has been asked to consolidate 21 federal suits against makers of the devices—and lawyers involved in the litigation predict that while the number of cases will not be large, their value could be significant.
July 27, 2015 at 12:48 PM
7 minute read
On the heels of warnings from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration about the risks of using power morcellators in uterine surgery, the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation has been asked to consolidate 21 federal suits against makers of the devices—and lawyers involved in the litigation predict that while the number of cases will not be large, their value could be significant.
Plaintiffs in power morcellator cases tend to have major medical bills and most are within the peak earning years of 40 to 60, according to those lawyers.
Patients with undiagnosed uterine cancer who undergo a hysterectomy or removal of fibroids performed with a power morcellator risk spreading cancerous cells within their abdomen and pelvis, reducing their chances of long-term survival, the FDA announced in April 2014. Now, suits are being filed nationwide against the companies that made the morcellators by women who underwent such procedures, or by the survivors of women who died after their operations.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View All
Social Media Policy for Judges Provides Guidance in a Changing World
3 minute read
Bank of America's Cash Sweep Program Attracts New Legal Fire in Class Action
3 minute read
'Something Really Bad Happened': J&J's Talc Bankruptcy Vote Under Attack
7 minute readTrending Stories
- 13 Incidents Lead to Charges Against the Alexander Brothers; Cousin Remains at Large
- 2Sidley Austin Elects Biggest Combined Class of Partners and Counsel in Firm History
- 3High Court Drops Case Over Nvidia's Effort to Ditch Fraud Suit
- 4Commentary: Law, Literature and Revenge
- 5Attorneys, Professors Share Support for Chancellor Following Musk's Online Attacks
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250
