The first case in a series of multidistrict transvaginal mesh lawsuits against the manufacturer C.R. Bard did not go as the company had hoped.
As a result, the health care products manufacturer intends to appeal, knowing full well that such a judgment sets the tone for the flood of future cases that are waiting in the pipeline. However, a federal judge has denied a motion from the defendant Bard to stay or hold the other pending cases while this one works its way through the appellate process.
In the case of Cisson v. C.R. Bard, the jury sided with the plaintiff, awarding her $250,000 in compensatory damages and $1.75 million in punitive damages.
There is some recent good news from the U.S. District Judge Joseph R. Goodwin that said the remaining three first cases (out of thousands pending against Bard in the district) will move forward as planned.
These lawsuits allege that plaintiffs suffered severe and sometimes debilitating injuries from the implantation of surgical mesh devices manufactured by Bard for the purposes of treating prolapse and/or stress urinary incontinence.
In the vast majority of these cases, the plaintiffs ended up requiring additional surgeries to have the implanted mesh removed after it penetrated abdominal organs, caused severe pain, urinary problems, recurrence of prolapse and/or incontinence, infection, perforation of blood vessels, bowels and bladders and in some cases, vaginal scarring and mesh erosion leading to severe discomfort and pain during sexual intercourse and other normal activities.
Following the Cisson case, Bard settled with another plaintiff, but two more trials are slated to begin in the next two months – Rizzo et al. v. C.R. Bard Inc. in October and Jones v. C.R. Bard Inc. in November.
Judge Goodwin further said that the remaining plaintiffs would be harmed if forced to wait for the first case to make its way through the appellate process before their cases could be heard. This is good news for all the pending cases and the potential future ones.
If you, a loved one has experienced problems and/or injuries described and listed above with a transvaginal mesh implant, we encourage you to contact Cross and Smith, LLC to schedule an appointment to talk to us regarding your potential claim.
Judge won’t stay bellwether pelvic mesh cases against Bard, Sept. 9, 2013, By Ronald V. Baker, Thomson Reuters
Alabama Nursing Homes Get “D” Grade for Poor Patient Care, Aug. 26, 2013, Alabama Transvaginal Mesh Injury Lawyer Blog
"I worked with these lawyers for almost 6 years as a paralegal and only left as my husband took a job in another state. I have worked for other personal injury law firms since and none of them come even close to the way this group of lawyers go above and beyond for their clients. They are true professionals, extremely detail oriented and efficient in the way they handle and work up each and every case."