We see commercials for mass tort lawsuits on television all the time. Fancy Hernia Mesh lawsuit lawyers get on the screen and tell you that they can get you millions of dollars. They make promises that they can’t keep and make it seem like winning a mass tort case is very easy.

The truth is quite different. Mass tort cases are filed against some of the largest and richest companies in the world. They typically involve very complicated medical issues. Some mass tort cases take more than a year to develop. They can be very painful for the plaintiffs involved.

As painful and as time-consuming as they may be, however, mass tort cases are necessary. They protect people like you from harmful and defective products. Most mass tort cases involve medical products, dangerous drugs or pollution.

Table of Contents

Hernia Mesh Case News

February 2024:  The trial in Bryan has been canceled by the judge, who urges the parties to pursue a global settlement.

January 2024: New hernia mesh lawsuits continue to be filed, with a recent lawsuit added directly to the MDL against Bard and Davol. This lawsuit represents the estate of a Massachusetts man who had the Kugel hernia patch. It’s worth noting that this case is not a wrongful death or survival action, as there is no allegation that the defective hernia mesh caused the man’s death. The ongoing filing of these lawsuits indicates the persistence of legal action related to hernia mesh injuries and highlights the need for resolution and accountability in these cases.

January 2024: To increase pressure on Bard to make reasonable settlement offers in the hernia mesh lawsuits in 2024, the plaintiff’s hernia mesh lawyers are seeking a new Case Management Order (CMO) to oversee the handling of cases and potential remand to state courts. The goal is to expedite the resolution of these cases and provide plaintiffs, many of whom have been waiting for years, with their day in court or a fair resolution of their claims.

The proposed order outlines a process for remanding cases in large groups at intervals, starting with the first group of 1,500 cases, which represents about 7.5% of the total filed cases. This approach aims to address the impracticality of the current pace of 1 to 2 trials per year, which would take thousands of years to try every case. Instead, the attorneys suggest a more efficient and logical organization of cases based on factors like the severity of injury, the length of time filed, and involvement in bellwether trials. Multi-plaintiff trials are also proposed to allocate costs efficiently and avoid duplicate testimony.

By streamlining the litigation process and expediting trials, this approach puts pressure on Bard to consider settling cases more quickly to avoid the burden of prolonged litigation and potentially unfavorable trial outcomes. It also provides plaintiffs with a clearer path to resolution and compensation for their injuries.

January 2023: The Bard hernia mesh class action multidistrict litigation (MDL) has now accumulated a total of 20,972 pending cases. This represents an increase of almost 600 new cases since October, when there was a temporary decrease in the total number of cases in the MDL.

December 2023:Johnson & Johnson and its subsidiary, Ethicon, have reached a settlement in a multidistrict litigation (MDL) in Georgia, which involved a total of 224 lawsuits. The settlement was formalized through a joint motion for dismissal of the claims, filed by both parties and granted by U.S. District Judge Richard W. Story.

In their statement, Ethicon Inc. emphasized their commitment to patient safety and clarified that the settlement should not be construed as an admission of liability or wrongdoing. The decision to settle was primarily driven by the desire to avoid a protracted legal process.

This settlement follows a previous agreement made approximately six months earlier, where the companies settled with 161 plaintiffs who were part of the same MDL.

December 2023: The fourth bellwether trial involving Bard is now scheduled for April 2024, although there had been hopes for it to take place in January. The plaintiff in this case, Jacob Bryan, underwent a procedure using a 3DMax hernia mesh, intended to repair an inguinal/groin hernia. Unfortunately, he experienced complications such as mesh deformation and chronic pain as a result of the procedure.

Initially chosen by the defendants as a bellwether trial some years ago, there was an unsuccessful attempt by the defendants to remove Bryan as a bellwether due to the extent of his complications. However, the MDL judge denied this motion, and Bryan remains a key case in the litigation.

While this case involves a different product, the 3DMax hernia mesh, the allegations are consistent with previous cases. The plaintiff alleges that Bard failed to adequately warn patients and healthcare providers about the risks and potential complications associated with the 3DMax mesh, including issues related to design and manufacturing defects. These allegations mirror the broader claims made by plaintiffs in the hernia mesh MDL against Bard.

November 2023: A status conference is set for December 19, 2023, during which the attorneys will update the judge on the progress of discovery in the Covidien hernia mesh MDL. They will also assess the current selection of bellwether cases and whether these cases effectively represent the various claims being made within the litigation. With a total of 786 lawsuits in the Covidien MDL (MDL-3029), it’s crucial to ensure that the chosen bellwether cases provide a comprehensive overview of the different issues and allegations in the litigation. This conference will play a vital role in shaping the future course of the MDL and its potential outcomes.

November 2023: The jury’s decision in the Stinson hernia mesh trial resulted in a verdict awarding $500,000. While this amount is notably less than the $4.8 million verdict seen in a previous similar case, it still represents a significant victory. This outcome underscores a trend of plaintiffs succeeding in these hernia mesh cases, demonstrating the effectiveness of their legal arguments and the persuasiveness of the evidence presented. The verdict, even though it’s not as high as the last one, still sends a strong message about the jury’s acknowledgment of the injuries and the accountability of the defendants in these cases.

November 2023: On Day 14 of the Stinson bellwether hernia mesh trial, the defense continued to build their case by calling Dr. Stephen Badylak, who has a history of testifying on behalf of Bard in similar lawsuits against patients. Additionally, Maureen Reitman, another expert witness who frequently testifies in such cases, was called to the stand.

Both the plaintiff and the defense in this trial appear confident in their respective chances of success, and there’s a clear focus on ensuring the trial’s proceedings don’t leave any room for potential appeals. Interestingly, despite the often adversarial nature of litigation, both parties have taken a collaborative step by filing a motion recommending the use of a single damages verdict form. This recommendation is in line with Maine law and is proposed as a measure to reduce juror confusion. The aim here is to prevent any potential issues related to appeals or retrials that might arise from the possibility of duplicative recoveries for the same injury. This joint motion reflects a pragmatic approach by both sides to streamline the trial’s outcome and minimize the risk of future legal complications

November 2023: Bard, in their defense strategy, has called upon several key witnesses to provide testimony in the trial. These include the surgeon who operated on Mr. Stinson, a pathology expert, and a former marketing director from Davol, who retired in June. The inclusion of Mr. Stinson’s surgeon is likely aimed at gaining insights into the surgical procedure and the immediate post-operative condition, which could be crucial in understanding the complications that arose afterward. The pathology expert’s testimony is presumably focused on the medical aspects of Mr. Stinson’s condition, particularly regarding the mesh implant and its effects. Lastly, the testimony from the retired Davol marketing director could provide context regarding the product’s marketing strategies and representations made by the company, which might be relevant to the case’s claims about product information and warnings. These testimonies from diverse professional backgrounds are integral to Bard’s defense, potentially offering a multifaceted view of the situation surrounding Mr. Stinson’s medical complications.

November 2023: Yesterday’s (October 31st)  proceedings in the trial were entirely focused on Dr. Boris Pomerants’ testimony. The day was dedicated to a comprehensive examination of his statements, encompassing continued direct questioning, followed by a detailed cross-examination, and concluding with a redirect session. This thorough exploration of Dr. Pomerants’ testimony reflects the significance of his role as an expert witness for the defense, particularly in providing an alternative perspective on the plaintiff’s medical condition and the potential causes of his pain. The depth and extent of the questioning underline the critical nature of his testimony in shaping the arguments and counterarguments in the case.

October 2023: Yesterday marked a significant shift in the trial, as the plaintiff concluded presenting his case. Following this, the defense initiated their case, introducing Dr. Boris Pomerants, a general surgeon from Columbus, Ohio, as their expert witness. The strategy of Bard, the defendant in this case, typically involves identifying alternative factors that could be responsible for the plaintiff’s injury. Dr. Pomerants’ testimony is a key part of this defense strategy.

Dr. Pomerants’ argument points to various factors other than the hernia mesh as potential causes of the plaintiff’s pain. Notably, he referenced an assault the plaintiff experienced 30 years ago, suggesting that this incident might be relevant to the current medical issues. He also posited that the plaintiff’s pre-existing “pervasive and chronic pre-implant pain” might have intensified his pain sensations and influenced his complaints of pain after the surgery. This perspective implies that the plaintiff’s ongoing pain issues are not solely or directly related to the mesh implant.

Such an argument, aiming to shift the focus away from the hernia mesh, could be perceived as a bit of a stretch. It attempts to draw connections between past incidents and pre-existing conditions with the current medical complaints, which could be seen as an effort to deflect blame from the hernia mesh itself. This approach is not uncommon in complex medical litigation, where defendants often seek to highlight alternative causes for injuries to mitigate their liability.

October 2023: As the highly anticipated Stinton trial unfolds, significant developments occurred yesterday. It was a pivotal day in the trial, marked by the testimony of the plaintiff, Mr. Stinson, as well as that of a crucial expert witness. This expert witness played a vital role in establishing a connection between the allegedly defective mesh and Mr. Stinson’s injuries, a key element in the plaintiff’s case.

To recap the context of this trial as detailed in the October 10th update, Mr. Stinson underwent a hernia repair surgery in 2015, during which a Bard hernia mesh was implanted. Subsequently, he began experiencing chronic and severe pain in his groin. A follow-up exploratory surgery two years later revealed that the mesh had migrated and crumpled into a ball, causing significant scarring, which was identified as the source of his pain. Despite the removal and replacement of the mesh, Mr. Stinson continued to suffer from pain. The testimonies provided yesterday are crucial in shedding light on these facts and contributing to the understanding of the case’s intricacies.

October 2023: For the first time since its inception, the Bard hernia mesh MDL has experienced a monthly decrease in the total number of pending cases. From last month’s count of 20,405, the figure has dropped by 36 cases, bringing the current total to 20,369. This development marks a significant shift from earlier in the year when the MDL was consistently adding several hundred new cases each month.

This reduction in pending cases could signal a deceleration in the overall momentum of the MDL, suggesting that the influx of new cases is slowing down. Alternatively, it might also indicate the beginning of a strategy by Bard to manage settlements outside the MDL framework more assertively. Either of these interpretations points to a possible change in the dynamics of the litigation, potentially impacting the future course of the MDL and the strategies of both plaintiffs and the defendant.

October 2023: As we approach the 3rd bellwether test trial in the MDL, it’s timely to revisit the key facts of the Stinson v. Davol Inc., et al. case. This case centers around Stinson, who underwent a hernia repair procedure in 2015, during which a Bard hernia mesh was used. However, not long after the surgery, Stinson started experiencing chronic and intense pain in the groin area.

Two years following the initial hernia operation, Stinson had to undergo exploratory surgery to identify the cause of his ongoing pain. This surgery revealed that the Bard mesh implant had shifted from its original position and had folded into a ball. This migration and deformation of the mesh led to significant scarring, which was identified as the root cause of Stinson’s persistent pain. Although the problematic mesh was removed and replaced, Stinson’s pain issues persisted.

The circumstances and medical complications in the Stinson case are perceived as being more compelling and clear-cut than those in the previous MDL hernia mesh bellwether case involving Milanesi. This difference in the factual matrix could potentially influence the outcome of the trial and its implications for related cases in the MDL.

October 2023: The upcoming trial in the MDL, specifically the Stinson case against Bard, is poised to commence soon. However, there’s a prevailing belief that the case might settle before reaching trial, based on the assessment that Bard, as a defendant, is likely to opt for a rational approach, potentially favoring a settlement.

It’s important to note that while this expectation is based on the current understanding and experience of our legal team, past predictions in similar situations have been incorrect. Indeed, an update indicates that this assumption was indeed mistaken, but, as it turned out, this miscalculation was ultimately beneficial. This situation highlights the unpredictable nature of legal proceedings, especially in complex MDL cases where outcomes can hinge on a multitude of factors, some of which might not be immediately apparent or may change over time.

September 2023: Judge Patti B. Saris of the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts, who is presiding over the Covidien hernia mesh lawsuits at the federal level, has recently endorsed a plan to advance the litigation process. This plan involves the preparation of six bellwether cases, with two of them selected for trial in early 2025. While the pace of this litigation has been relatively slow, setting trial dates for early 2025 represents a significant step forward. This development is expected to catalyze the momentum in the litigation and could encourage Covidien to present substantial settlement offers to the over 600 plaintiffs involved in this case.

Interestingly, the Covidien litigation is perceived as being psychologically interconnected with the Bard MDL (Multidistrict Litigation). There is an anticipation that a substantial verdict in the upcoming Stinson trial next month in the Bard MDL could have a ripple effect, positively influencing not only the Bard plaintiffs but also those involved in other hernia mesh class actions, including the Covidien cases. This interrelation underscores the broader impact that key verdicts in MDLs can have on similar litigations, setting precedents and influencing the dynamics of settlement negotiations.

September 2023: Over the last three months, the Bard hernia mesh MDL has experienced a notable increase in its caseload, with approximately 700 new cases being filed. This addition brings the total number of pending cases in the MDL to 20,405. However, this recent influx represents a significant decrease in the monthly volume of new cases compared to earlier in the year. Previously, the litigation was witnessing a consistent rate of around 500 new cases per month. This recent decline in new case filings indicates a shift in the pattern of litigation related to the Bard hernia mesh MDL.

September 2023: In a significant development for the hernia mesh class action against C.R. Bard, we are now just six weeks away from the next bellwether test trial. Yesterday, Judge Sargus confirmed that the Stinson v. Davol, Inc., et al. case (18-cv-1022) is scheduled to commence trial on October 16, 2023. This trial is highly anticipated as it serves as a critical bellwether, potentially setting a precedent for other cases in the class action.

Additionally, Judge Sargus announced plans for a fourth bellwether trial, slated for early 2024. This trial will involve the case of Bryan v. C.R. Bard Inc., et al. (18-cv-1440). The selection of this case for a bellwether trial further indicates the court’s strategic approach in handling the multifaceted issues presented by the hernia mesh litigation. These bellwether trials are pivotal in shaping the direction of the broader class action and can significantly influence negotiations and outcomes in subsequent cases.

August 2023: The nature of injuries stemming from defective hernia mesh often means that they are not immediately noticeable, leading to a continuous filing of new lawsuits. Reflecting this ongoing issue, the Bard MDL class action saw the addition of nearly 200 new lawsuits over the past month. This influx has brought the total number of cases within the Bard MDL class action to 20,216, highlighting the sustained legal challenges and the growing scope of this litigation.

August 2023: The current breakdown of hernia mesh MDL cases by manufacturer stands as follows: C.R. Bard at 20,126; Ethicon has 565; Covidien with 601; and Atrium at 3,378.

April 2023: Ethicon removes several cases from the MDL, which continues despite a confidential settlement made in September 2021.

March 2023: The third hernia mesh bellwether trial, Stinson v. C.R. Bard, et al., originally set for May 2023, gets rescheduled to October 16, 2023, by the judge.

February 2023: The C.R. Bard MDL sees a rise in claims, now standing at 18,813.

April 2022: In the second bellwether trial, a jury rules in favor of Antonio Milanesi, awarding him a verdict of $255,000 against C.R. Bard.

Where Can You File a Claim?

One of the more recent mass tort issues has been that of the hernia mesh. It is used to help repair hernias. It’s a pretty simple concept, really. A hernia happens because your intestines bulge through a weak spot on your hernia wall. Doctors use this product to plug the hole. It’s kind of like patching a leak in your bike tire or swimming pool.

Unfortunately, these products are far from perfect. In fact, it’s been found to be quite harmful to many patients. Our Class Action Attorneys are dealing with a number of these claims.

Why Do Mass Tort Lawyers Believe Hernia Mesh Injures their Clients?

Hernia mesh is used in about 90% of all hernia repair surgeries. Most of the products used are manufactured by Bard. Bard has been named in multiple lawsuits over the last few years for all sorts of defective medical products. Another large manufacturer of it is Johnson and Johnson.

Every year, close to a million patients in the U.S. receive a hernia mesh. Sadly, a lot of these patients will end up with negative side effects from the mesh. In fact, it’s estimated that about 50,000 patients will end up filing suit against  manufacturers for their injuries.

The problem it is that it’s made out of plastic. Plastic can break and tear. When this happens, patients end up with all sorts of medical issues, including:

Hernia Mesh Lawsuit

  • Chronic pain
  • Infections
  • Bowel blockage and obstructed bowels
  • Tissue fusion
  • Mesh migration
  • Tearing of internal organs
  • Need for secondary hernia repair surgery
  • The mesh can travel through the body

If you have a hernia mesh and have experienced any of these, you need to contact a Los Angeles mass tort attorney.

Hernia Mesh Lawsuit

Why Can’t Mass Tort Lawyers Get Hernia Mesh Off the Market?

With all the issues caused by hernia mesh, it begs the question to ask why they’re still used. As mentioned earlier, they are still used in over 90% of all hernia repair surgeries. Despite the obvious dangers, this product is still on the market in most countries.

Johnson and Johnson had several varieties of their product on the market. After severe warnings from the FDA, they did take one version off the market. However, they have no problem marketing the rest of their products for  surgeries.

Until it is taken off the market, there will continue to be lawsuits. The product is proven to be dangerous. The manufacturers and doctors are aware of this. So are mass tort lawyers in California.

Contact us today at 1-866-CALL-RSD to start the claims process.

California Mass Tort Lawyers Are Aware of Several Large Hernia Mesh Cases Pending

Although some of the lawsuits have been settled or dismissed, many are still pending. There are a few major class action suits pending right now. Some may be settled. Others will have to go to trial.

The popular hernia mesh lawsuits pending are:

Bard – Davol Division

The two main Bard products included in these lawsuits are the Composix E/X and the Composix LIP. The company has already paid out hundreds of millions in settled cases. There are many federal cases pending with over 1,800 plaintiffs. And, on top of that, there are individual and class action lawsuits pending against Bard in many states.

Johnson and Johnson (Ethicon)

The division of Johnson and Johnson that makes hernia mesh is called Ethicon. There are close to 1,500 federal lawsuits pending against Johnson and Johnson. The litigation is being handled out of Georgia. The company expects to be named in many more state and federal lawsuits in the coming years. In fact, the first trial isn’t even scheduled to start until the fall of 2019. Although they aren’t the largest manufacturer, they are the most popular named Defendant. This is because the name brings a lot of recognition to the public.

Atrium Medical

This company makes a hernia mesh called C-QUR. There are only about 500 lawsuits filed against Atrium. Most of these cases are filed out of New Hampshire. But, like the other defendants, they can expect to face more suits as time goes on.

Most mass tort cases are combined into something called Multi-Jurisdictional Litigation. This just means that they combine federal cases from all over the country and try them in one court. This is more streamlined and less confusing. It also saves the plaintiffs, defendants, and courts money. If they had to try cases in every state, it would take forever and cost millions.

Hernia Mesh Lawsuit

If You’ve Been Injured by a Hernia Mesh, Contact a Mass Tort Attorney

The latest update according to drugwatch.com, is following multiple reschedulings, the third bellwether trial involving hernia mesh and C.R. Bard is now slated to commence in October 2023. While Ethicon and Atrium opted for confidential settlements in 2021, there are still ongoing cases in the MDLs (multidistrict litigations) in 2023, which may proceed to trial.

Also, if you or your child have been injured, you need to contact a mass tort attorney. You only have so long to file your claim. If you miss your window of opportunity, you may be forever barred from filing your claim.

Call and schedule your free initial consultation today. Your attorney will review your case and let you know what it may be worth. The insurance companies and manufacturers have attorneys working for them. You should too.