Tens of thousands of women have come forward alleging injuries caused by transvaginal mesh. Victims and their attorneys claim drug manufacturers failed to notice critical design flaws or notify consumers of the potential risks.
Reuters recently estimated that as many as 100,000 women have made claims against manufacturers of transvaginal mesh. As plaintiffs, victims claim that the mesh caused serious and painful side effects.
If you are one of the many injured by this product, you may wonder if you have a claim to receive compensation. The best way to know is to set up a free consultation with an attorney who specializes in defective product claims. Your attorney can advise you on the unique aspects of your situation, and offer guidance going forward.
Boston Scientific and Other Manufacturers to Pay Millions in Restitution to Victims
One of the larger class action lawsuits was levied against Boston Scientific, a prominent manufacturer of transvaginal meshes. Patients who used either the Pinnacle or Advantage Fit vaginal mesh claimed the mesh caused side effects like bleeding, nerve damage, pain, and other severe medical complications.
One 51-year-old plaintiff had to undergo two corrective surgeries after using Boston Scientific products. Even after the surgeries, she claimed that parts of the mesh remained in her body and continued to cause her pain.
The jury overseeing the lawsuit found Boston Scientific liable for the damages. The jury upheld the claims that Boston Scientific had indeed not only failed to design a safe product, they failed to warn customers of known risks associated with their product.
Because of this, the jury awarded $25 million to the plaintiffs for damages as well as an additional $75 million as a punitive measure. The recent verdict is one of the largest since lawsuits have made the public aware of the dangers of transvaginal mesh. Boston Scientific, along with many other manufacturers, has settled out of court with plaintiffs. The pending lawsuits against Boston Scientific alone number more than 25,000.
Endo’s American Medical Systems were the first major manufacturer to resolve litigation related to transvaginal mesh injuries. Last year they announced they had set aside $1.6 billion to settle about 40,000 filed and unfiled claims, according to Bloomberg.
Do I Have A Claim?
In a defective product case, the plaintiff does not need to establish negligence. Instead, since the defendant is strictly liable for injuries, the plaintiff only needs to prove they used the product as intended and were injured as a result.
As is the case with many defective product injuries, a series of conditions must be proven:
- You (the plaintiff) had a transvaginal mesh implanted
- You suffered injuries
- The injuries you suffered were a result of the transvaginal mesh
- The mesh implant was being used as intended
- The device was defective.
Another claim that can be levied against the manufacturers of this product is as a consumer you were not notified of the potential dangers of using the transvaginal mesh. Though many manufacturers were aware of the potential medical complications, they released their product anyway—without providing consumers with a visible warning label detailing the risks.
Medical manufacturers have already set aside money for settling injury claims for transvaginal implants. If you have been injured by this dangerous product, you could be entitled to a share of the settlement money.
About the Author:
A partner at Lawlor, White & Murphey and a distinguished personal injury lawyer, Ben Murphey tries complex disputes that include civil appeals, maritime and admiralty claims, wrongful death, and labor disputes. Mr. Murphey has been recognized for his excellence in the area of personal injury litigation by being rewarded with a 10/10 Avvo Rating and named a Super Lawyers “Rising Star” for the last four consecutive years (2011-2014). Mr. Murphey regularly tries cases in state and federal courts around the country, being admitted to practice before all Florida courts and the United States Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit.