Philadelphia Jury Slams J&J With $120M Pelvic Mesh Verdict
The verdict came after a three-week trial in Judge Kenneth Powell's courtroom, and the award included $20 million in compensatory damages, as well as $100 million in punitive damages.
April 25, 2019 at 10:37 AM
3 minute read
A Philadelphia jury has hit a Johnson & Johnson subsidiary with a $120 million verdict for allegedly failing to warn about the dangers of one of its pelvic mesh products.
The verdict came down Wednesday afternoon in Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas Judge Kenneth Powell's courtroom after three weeks of trial, and included $20 million in compensatory damages, as well as $100 million in punitive damages.
The verdict marks the seventh time a Philadelphia jury has hit J&J subsidiary Ethicon with a multimillion-dollar verdict over one of its pelvic mesh products, and it also marks the first time a Philadelphia jury has awarded more than $100 million in a pelvic mesh case.
The plaintiff in the case, Susan McFarland, a 68-year-old from Altoona, had Ethicon's TVT-O pelvic mesh product implanted in 2008 to treat urinary incontinence, but she claimed that the plastic eroded, causing pain and chronic uterine tract infections. She, as well as nearly 90 plaintiffs with claims pending in Philadelphia, contended that Ethicon failed to properly warn about the dangers of the product.
Kline & Specter Tracie Palmer was lead counsel for McFarland, along with Braden Lepisto.
“This verdict speaks volumes. This is a product still on the market and the jury's message to Johnson and Johnson is take this product off the market for the health and safety of America's women,” Palmer said.
Kate Skagerberg of Beck Redden was lead counsel for Ethicon. The company was also represented by Adam Spice of Butler Snow and Alicia Hickok of Drinker Biddle & Reath.
In an emailed statement, a spokeswoman for Ethicon said the award was “inconsistent with the science, Ethicon's actions, and previous verdicts related to our TVT-O product, which continues to be the gold standard of treatment for stress urinary incontinence.”
“We believe the evidence showed Ethicon's TVT-O device was properly designed and that Ethicon acted appropriately and responsibly in the research, development and marketing of the product. Unfortunately, the jury was not permitted to hear critical evidence related to the FDA's review and classification of these devices, which we believe significantly influenced the verdict and punitive award in this case,” spokeswoman Mindy Tinsley said, adding that the company plans to appeal the verdict.
The case, McFarland v. Ethicon, was also subject to several efforts by Ethicon to have Powell removed from hearing any pelvic mesh cases.
In March, Ethicon, which is the primary defendant in the pelvic mesh mass tort in Philadelphia, made a motion, arguing that Powell needed to be removed from hearing any of the cases because his mother brought suit against another J&J subsidiary over the blood thinner Xarelto. According to the company, Powell failed to properly disclose his mother's lawsuit until after he presided over one trial and was assigned to handle another.
Those efforts, however, were dismissed by the court.
The verdict in McFarland is the latest in a series of multimillion-dollar verdicts that Philadelphia juries have awarded plaintiffs in the pelvic mesh litigation, including Hammons v. Ethicon, which resulted in a $12.5 million verdict in 2015, and Emmett v. Ethicon, which ended in a $41 million verdict in January. The award, however, also came one week after a Philadelphia jury handed Ethicon a rare defense win.
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
© 2025 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'Discordant Dots': Why Phila. Zantac Judge Rejected Bid for His Recusal
3 minute readPittsburgh Jury Tries to Award $22M Against J&J in Talc Case Despite Handing Up Defense Verdict
4 minute readPlaintiffs Seek Redo of First Trial Over Medical Device Plant's Emissions
4 minute readTrending Stories
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
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