$35M Punitives Award Brings Bard Pelvic Mesh Verdict to $68M
A jury in Bergen County, New Jersey, on Friday awarded $35 million in punitive damages in a suit against C.R. Bard over defective pelvic mesh products.
April 13, 2018 at 05:02 PM
4 minute read
Pelvic mesh
A jury in Bergen County, New Jersey, on April 13 awarded $35 million in punitive damages in a suit against C.R. Bard over defective pelvic mesh products. With the $33 million award for compensatory damages from the same jury on April 12, the total award to Mary McGinniss and her husband comes to $68 million.
The jury found that Bard's Avaulta Solo Prolapse Repair System and the Align Transobturator Stress Urinary Incontinence Repair System were defectively designed and failed to contain adequate warnings. The jury found that as a result of the defects in these two medical devices, Mary McGinniss underwent several surgeries and has been left with permanent pain and serious injuries.
The verdict came after a trial before Superior Court Judge James DeLuca in Hackensack, New Jersey. The case is the first bellwether trial against Bard in New Jersey's mass tort program. According to the New Jersey judiciary's website, 154 pelvic mesh cases against Bard are pending before DeLuca.
The jury's compensatory verdict awarded Mary McGinniss $23 million in
compensatory damages and $10 million to her husband, Thomas, for loss of consortium.
The plaintiffs were represented by Adam Slater of Mazie, Slater, Katz & Freeman in Roseland, New Jersey.
Slater said the standard for punitive damages was met because “the company knew these products were going to harm women based on the track record for similar products. Then when they … were harming women, they kept selling the product and continued to tell doctors these products were safe.”
Mary McGinniss suffered severe scarring and pain and went though multiple operations in attempts to remove the deteriorating product from her body. She experiences severe pain during intercourse and will suffer “chronic inflammation for the rest of her life,” said Slater.
The jury consisted of nine men and three women.
With the close of the case, “virtually every important issue is decided” in the Bard pelvic mesh litigation, Slater said. “Trying these cases is more streamlined—it allows us to try these cases quicker.” Asked if the verdict would prompt Bard to settle other mesh cases, Slater said, “they can always come and settle, but until that time, we'll keep trying these cases.”
Bard was represented by Lori Cohen of Greenberg Traurig in Atlanta. A Bard spokesman, Troy Kirkpatrick, said in an email, “We do not believe this verdict is supported by the facts or the law, and plan to appeal.”
The $68 million total in the McGinniss case after the addition of punitive damages is topped by only two other pelvic mesh verdicts nationwide, according to the website Drugwatch.com.
In May 2015, a Delaware jury awarded $100 million to Deborah Barba on claims that Boston Scientific's Pinnacle and Advantage Fit mesh implants were defectively designed after the devices eroded and caused vaginal scarring, constant pain and other complications.
In Barba's case, an appellate judge deemed the award excessive and reduced it to $10 million, according to Drugwatch.com.
And in September 2014, a Texas state jury awarded $73.5 million to Martha Salazar after finding Boston Scientific was negligent for failing to warn doctors and patients of risks associated with the Obtryx bladder sling. An appeals court later reduced the award to $34.6 million, Drugwatch.com reported.
And ALM publication The Legal Intelligencer reported in September 2017 a $57.1 million verdict against Johnson & Johnson subsidiary Ethicon in a pelvic mesh trial in Philadelphia.
Bard settled more than 500 pelvic mesh lawsuits for $21 million in 2014, and resolved another 3,000 cases for $200 million in 2015.
Bard has also seen verdicts in individual pelvic mesh suits for $5 million, $3.6 million and $2 million in recent years, according to Drugwatch.com.
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$10 Million Settlement Reached for Baby Injured by Disconnected Ventilator
3 minute readJury Awards Horizon $2.4 Million for Fraudulent Billing Against 3 NJ Health Care Providers
2 minute readVirtua Drug Tests Pregnancy Patients Without Consent, NJ Attorney General Alleges in New Suit
3 minute readNJ Supreme Court Considers Ability to Add Nonparty Doctors to Med Mal Verdict Sheets
4 minute readTrending Stories
- 1More Big Law Firms Rush to Match Associate Bonuses, While Some Offer Potential for Even More
- 2OpenAI, NYTimes Counsel Quarrel Over Erased OpenAI Training Data
- 3Saying Your Goodbyes—Ethical Obligations When Transitioning to a New Firm
- 4Dog Gone It, Target: Provider of Retailer's Mascot Dog Sues Over Contract Cancellation
- 5Lululemon Faces Legal Fire Over Its DEI Program After Bias Complaints Surface
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