Woman Who Needed 9 Surgeries to Fix Defective Mesh Awarded $41M
A Philadelphia jury has awarded $41 million to a woman who underwent nine surgeries to treat injuries she allegedly sustained as a result of defective transvaginal mesh.
February 07, 2019 at 03:44 PM
4 minute read
Emmett v. Ethicon
$41M Verdict
Date of Verdict: Jan. 31.
Court and Case No.: C.P. Philadelphia No. 1307-01495.
Judge: Kenneth Powell.
Type of Action: Products liability.
Injuries: Urinary incontinence, painful bladder contractions, pain during sex, nine surgeries to correct defective mesh issues.
Plaintiffs Counsel: Thomas R. Kline and Kila Baldwin, Kline & Specter.
Defense Counsel: Tarek Ismail, Goldman Ismail Tomaselli Brennan & Baum; Anita Modak-Truran, Butler Snow and Joseph O'Neil, Campbell Conroy & O'Neil.
Comment:
A Philadelphia jury has awarded $41 million to a woman who underwent nine surgeries to treat injuries she allegedly sustained as a result of defective transvaginal mesh.
The 12-member jury in Emmett v. Ethicon rendered the verdict Thursday in Judge Kenneth Powell's courtroom following a five-week trial. The award includes $15 million in compensatory damages, $25 million in punitive damages and $1 million on a loss of consortium claim.
The verdict is the latest in a wave of multimillion-dollar verdicts juries have awarded over Ethicon's pelvic mesh products over the past few years
Kline & Specter attorneys Thomas R. Kline and Kila Baldwin co-tried the case for plaintiff Suzanne Emmett, and attorney Tarek Ismail of Goldman Ismail Tomaselli Brennan & Baum, Anita Modak-Truran of Butler Snow and Joseph O'Neil of Campbell Conroy & O'Neil were defense counsel for Ethicon, a Johnson & Johnson subsidiary.
Following the verdict, Kline said “overwhelming” evidence convinced the jury.
“Evidence in the case was overwhelming as to the product defect, and the testimony as to the damages which were caused to Suzanne Emmett were devastating,” Kline said. ”The case involves one of thousands of women who were injured by grotesquely defective products, many of whom have entered into de minimis settlements with Johnson & Johnson. This case should be seen through the lens of how a jury views their product, as well as the monetary value of the injury.”
Mindy Tinsley, a spokeswoman for Ethicon, said the company plans to appeal the verdict, adding that the products were properly designed and the company adequately warned surgeons about the risks.
“Importantly, the jury found that the devices performed as surgeons expected,” she said in the statement. “Ethicon stands by, and will continue to defend, our pelvic mesh products in litigation.”
According to Kline, Emmett, 57, had three pelvic mesh devices implanted after she suffered organ prolapse. The mesh, however, ended up repeatedly eroding into her vagina, leaving her with urinary incontinence, painful bladder contractions and pain during sex, Kline said. According to Kline, she underwent nine surgical procedures and underwent more than 40 nerve treatments, including injections. Kline also said the husband's loss of consortium claim was bolstered by evidence that a piece of mesh cut Michael Emmett's penis “like a piece of barbed wire” during sex.
The injuries, according to Kline, are expected to be permanent.
Kline also noted that the defense contended the case was brought outside the statute of limitations, since the mesh was installed in 2007 and her lawsuit was filed in 2013.
Emmett's case is one out of nearly 90 cases pending in Philadelphia and more than 33,000 pending across the country stemming from pelvic mesh devices and allegations that the mesh-makers failed to properly warn about the risks of the devices.
At one point, with more than 100,000 pelvic mesh cases pending in a federal multidistrict litigation against six manufacturers, the pelvic mesh litigation was one of the largest-ever consolidated matters, attorneys said.
The cases, however, have recently begun to settle in large batches. Some attorneys, however–including Kline & Specter's Shanin Specter—have been critical of those settlements, claiming many lawyers took on too many cases and, as a result, were forced to settle for small amounts.
—Max Mitchell, of the Law Weekly
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 AllFederal Judge Allows Elderly Woman's Consumer Protection Suit to Proceed Against Citizens Bank
5 minute readJudge Leaves Statute of Limitations Question in Injury Crash Suit for a Jury
4 minute readSupreme Court's Ruling in 'Students for Fair Admissions' and Its Impact on DEI Initiatives in the Workplace
6 minute readMembership Has Its Privileges: Bankruptcy Court Examines LLC's Authority to File Bankruptcy
8 minute readTrending Stories
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