FREE Case Review (866) 588-0600

Bard Crurasoft Hernia Patch Lawsuit in 2024 (Latest Updates)

Since 2005, reports of similar Bard hernia patch defects surfaced, posing potentially life-threatening risks to the thousands of Americans who had been implanted with the devices. According to various reports, the product, which consists of a “memory recoil ring” that opens once the patch has been inserted, can break and cause organ punctures and fistulas—abnormal passageways between intestinal organs.
Award Logos
Awards & recognition
C.L. Mike Schmidt Published by C.L. Mike Schmidt
Free Confidential Lawsuit Review
If you or a loved one was injured, you should contact our lawyers immediately. You may be entitled to compensation by filing a lawsuit and we can help. Please click the button below for a Free Case Evaluation or call us toll-free 24 hrs/day by dialing (866) 588-0600.

Start My Free Case Review

In a landmark decision, a Rhode Island jury ordered Becton, Dickinson, and Co.’s C.R. Bard subsidiary to pay $4.8 million in a hernia mesh lawsuit. The plaintiff, Paul Trevino, alleged that he suffered severe gastrointestinal complications after receiving the company’s Ventralex™ hernia repair mesh.
This verdict was reached after a month-long bellwether trial in Providence Superior Court. Given its history of substantial jury awards, Rhode Island is considered one of the most favorable states for plaintiffs in hernia mesh litigation.

Other Significant Settlements

  • $250,000 and $500,000 Settlements: In addition to the Rhode Island verdict, two plaintiffs in the multidistrict litigation (MDL) in Ohio were awarded $250,000 and $500,000 for injuries linked to Bard’s hernia mesh products.
  • $184 Million Settlement: Bard previously settled 2,600 Kugel Mesh defective product cases for $184 million in 2013.
The recent $4.8 million verdict against C.R. Bard highlights the significant legal challenges facing manufacturers of hernia mesh products.
As more cases proceed through the legal system, plaintiffs seek justice for injuries sustained from these medical devices. For those affected, staying informed about settlements and upcoming trials is essential for understanding potential compensation avenues.

November 13, 2023, C.R. Bard Bellwether Trial Update

According to the United States District Court, the 4th bellwether trial involving C.R. Bard et al, which is scheduled to take place in Jan. 2024 in Rhode Island state court, features plaintiff Jacob Bryan in the case management conference. In 2018, Bryan filed a class action lawsuit in Rhode Island after suffering complications following placement with a 3DMax Bard hernia mesh implant [1].

These complications, including hernia mesh deformation and ongoing pain, have led to a continued need for medical care and potentially additional surgery for Bryan, according to the Rhode Island class action lawsuit.

Defendants failed to warn or notify doctors, regulatory agencies, and consumers of the severe and life-threatening risks associated with polypropylene, the complaint states. Defendants were responsible for the research, design, development, testing, manufacture, production, marketing, promotion, distribution and sale of 3DMax, including providing the warnings and instructions concerning the product.

Central to Bryan’s bellwether trial class action MDL are allegations similar to those in other Bard hernia mesh cases. Bryan claims in the Rhode Island bellwether test trial that C.R. Bard and Becton Dickinson, or BD, failed to adequately warn the public and medical community about the risks associated with the Bard hernia mesh.

This includes allegations of failing to mention known risks and downplaying the potential seriousness and frequency of adverse effects.

The Bard hernia mesh lawsuit also raises questions about the design and manufacturing of the 3DMax hernia mesh, suggesting that flaws in these areas may have contributed to the complications suffered by recipients.

The C.R. Bard Hernia Mesh Ring May Break and Cause Pain, Infection, and Other Complications.

The Fight Against Hernia Mesh: Multidistrict Litigation Unveiled

According to the American Bar Association 2021 publication, Bard Hernia mesh patch lawsuits filed in Rhode Island state court have evolved into multidistrict litigations (MDLs). This legal mechanism consolidates similar lawsuits against a common defendant for pretrial proceedings.

Unlike class-action lawsuits, where plaintiffs are treated as a single entity, a hernia mesh MDL allows individual plaintiffs to retain their separate identities [2].

This approach streamlines the legal process, reduces redundancy, and ensures consistent rulings on common issues, while still allowing individual cases to proceed to a hernia mesh trial if necessary, the ABA said.

Detailed Monthly Updates on C.R. Bard Mesh MDL Case Numbers by Manufacturer

Staying updated on the progression of hernia mesh MDLs is crucial for affected individuals and their legal representatives. As of 2023, detailed monthly breakdowns reveal the number of MDL cases filed against various manufacturers.

These statistics provide insights into the scale of the hernia mesh MDL, the manufacturers most frequently named in hernia mesh lawsuits, and the potential implications for future cases.

Regular updates can also shed light on emerging trends, global settlement discussions, and other pivotal developments in the litigation landscape.

What is a Surgical Mesh?

As stated by ScienceDirect, surgical mesh is a medical device used to provide additional support for weakened or damaged tissues [3]. Most mesh devices are made from synthetic materials or animal tissue.

Surgical mesh constructed from synthetic materials can be found in knitted mesh or non-knitted sheet forms, while synthetic materials may be absorbable, non-absorbable, or a combination of the two.

Animal-derived meshes are composed of animal tissue that has been processed and disinfected to be used as an implanted device. These animal-derived meshes are absorbable, and most tissues used to produce these implants are from a pig or cow source.

Non-absorbable mesh is designed to remain in the body indefinitely; however, these products may degrade over time. These meshes are used to provide permanent reinforcement to the repaired hernia.

The absorbable mesh will be absorbed and lose strength over time and is not intended to provide permanent reinforcement to the repair site. As the material is absorbed, new tissue growth is intended to strengthen the repair site.

Bard Hernia Mesh Complications

Hernia mesh implants can lead to various complications, which can be categorized based on the timing of their occurrence.
According to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) 2023 notice, C.R. Bard hernia mesh implants have been linked to the following adverse health complications [4]:

Symptoms of Hernia Mesh Failure

Hernia mesh complications can manifest in various ways, depending on the severity of the issue.

Some of them include:

  • Pain and Discomfort: Most frequently occurring symptom, with tenderness and bruising near the incision site. Pain may appear in the stomach, abdomen, groin, leg, or testicles.
  • Bleeding and Infection: Chronic infections may cause redness, heat, or fluid accumulation near the implant site (seroma).
  • Bowel Obstruction: Adhesions may block the large or small intestine, leading to severe complications requiring surgical intervention.
  • Erectile Dysfunction: Reported in men post-surgery, including ED, loss of sensation, and testicular shrinkage due to reduced blood supply.
  • Hernia Recurrence: Migration, adhesion, or perforation of the mesh may lead to recurrence despite initial repair.

Immediate and Long-Term Complications

Complication Severity Level Frequency of Occurrence Statistics
Bleeding Moderate 0.5% – 2.3% Hematoma incidence: 0.5% to 2.3% [6].
Infection Severe 1% – 8% Surgical site infection rates: 1% to 8% [9].
Bowel Perforation Severe Rare Less than 1% incidence [6].
Mesh Migration Moderate Estimated 2.7% Occurs in 2.7% of cases [8].
Chronic Pain Severe 0.3% – 68% Significant life impact for up to 3.8% [6].
Adhesions Moderate Up to 3.2% Adhesion formation: up to 3.2% [8].

Hernia Mesh Erosion and Shrinkage

A 2023 study in Scientific Reports highlighted high rates of hernia mesh shrinkage, which can lead to hernia recurrence [5]. Key findings include:

  • Shrinkage Rates: Lightweight Physiomesh exhibited higher shrinkage (17.7% to 35.7%) compared to medium-weight Ventralight mesh (19.3% to 22.2%).
  • Anchor Impact: Mesh shrinkage was higher with metal tacks like ProTack™ compared to sutures or other anchors.
  • Postoperative Impact: Shrinkage remains a leading cause of hernia recurrence despite advancements in mesh design.

The postoperative recurrence rate of inguinal hernia has recently been greatly reduced by replacing tissue repair methods with mesh repair methods, the researchers said. However, there are still exists some cases of recurrence, and intraoperative findings in recurrent cases have revealed mesh shrinkage and migration.

Bleeding Risks

Bleeding complications are a significant concern, particularly for patients on blood thinners like warfarin or aspirin [6]. Common causes include:

  • Surgical Technique Issues: Improper port placement or trauma during mesh fixation can result in intraoperative bleeding.
  • Vascular Risks: Bleeding from arteries or veins near the surgical site is a critical concern, requiring precise surgical techniques to minimize complications.

As stated by the National Center for Biotechnology and Information in their 2020 study, bleeding is most worrisome in patients who require aspirin during surgery due to heart risk or take blood thinners such as Coumadin (warfarin), Lovenox (enoxaparin), Plavix (clopidrogel), Xarelto (rivaroxaban), Pradaxa (dabigatran) [].

For hernia repair with mesh, additional adverse events include migration or shrinkage (contraction) of the mesh itself, which may more likely be associated with the previously mentioned complications of hernia repair. – The FDA said

Hernia Mesh Migration

Research in the Caspian Journal of Internal Medicine indicates that mesh migration can occur years after hernia repair surgery [8]. Key points include:

  • Complications: Migration can lead to fistulas, adhesions, abscesses, bowel obstruction, and severe infections.
  • Symptoms: Patients may experience nausea, fever, chills, vomiting, and swelling, although some cases remain asymptomatic until a medical emergency arises.

Mesh migration is a rare consequence of incisional hernia repair with a prosthetic mesh, the researchers concluded. It can happen years after a hernia repair and it is additionally crucial to consider as a differential diagnosis in all patients who show unusual symptoms or abdominal pain.

Infected Hernia Mesh Implants

The Journal of Gastrointestinal Surgery (2022) reports that hernia mesh infections often develop months or years post-surgery [9]. Key findings include:

  • Risk Factors: Patients with obesity or type 2 diabetes face higher infection risks.
  • Deep Infections: These differ from wound infections and are typically caused by bacteria colonizing the mesh implant.
  • Prevalence: Between 1% and 8% of hernia mesh surgeries result in infection.

Bleeding can occur intraoperatively from the cremasteric artery, the internal spermatic artery, branches of the inferior epigastric vessels, deep circumflex artery and the external iliac vessels, iliac circumflex vessels, and obturator vessels, the study’s authors said. Careful surgical technique with attention to proper hemostasis and pressure generally obviates the need for formal vascular intervention.

According to a ConsumerNotice publication from 2024 [11], hernia mesh complications may be easy or difficult to identify, depending on the severity of the issue.

Understanding the potential risks and complications is crucial for informed decision-making before undergoing hernia repair surgery. If you or a loved one have experienced any of these complications, consult a healthcare professional or seek legal advice to explore potential compensation options.

Hernia Mesh vs. Stitches

As stated in a 2020 study published in BJS Open, one of the significant differences between using surgical mesh and sutures is that a mesh product has the potential to move or shrink, leading to severe health complications [10].

This is particularly true if the mesh is defective or contains a polypropylene coating. If a perforation occurs, this can cause a severe infection called sepsis.

Mesh repair of umbilical hernia has been associated with a reduced recurrence rate compared with suture closure, but potentially at the expense of increased postoperative complications and chronic pain, the researchers said.

If you were implanted with a hernia mesh device, symptoms of mesh failure may include constipation, fatigue, fever, irritable bowel, severe pain, and urinary issues.

You should consult your healthcare provider immediately if you notice any of these symptoms. Unfortunately, hernia mesh complications can occur within days to even years after hernia mesh surgery.

Your healthcare provider needs to keep the hernia mesh after extracting it from your body, as this will be a key piece of evidence in your case. Your healthcare provider can learn how to do this by contacting the lawyers at Schmidt & Clark, LLP.

Eligibility Criteria for Filing a Bard Hernia Mesh Lawsuit

Potential plaintiffs must meet specific eligibility criteria to file a C.R. Bard hernia mesh lawsuit. Typically, these criteria include having undergone C.R. Bard hernia repair surgery where hernia mesh was used, experiencing complications or injuries believed to be caused by the hernia mesh devices, and undergoing or being recommended for revision surgery to address these complications.

Affected individuals must consult with legal professionals to assess their eligibility and understand the potential legal remedies available.

Statute of Limitations by State

Plaintiffs need to be aware of the statute of limitations for filing a lawsuit related to hernia mesh complications.

Below are some key states and their respective deadlines:

  • Rhode Island: 3 years from the injury’s date or discovery.
  • Ohio: 2 years from the date of injury.
  • California: 2 years from the date of injury or discovery.
  • New York: 3 years from the date of injury.

How to Choose a Bard Hernia Mesh Lawyer?

Choosing the right lawyer for a hernia mesh lawsuit is pivotal. Given the complexity of these cases and the formidable resources of hernia mesh manufacturers, it’s essential to select an attorney with a track record of handling hernia mesh MDL against large corporations.

Experience in medical device lawsuits, a deep understanding of the medical implications, and a commitment to client advocacy are key attributes to look for. Potential plaintiffs should also consider the attorney’s past settlements and verdicts, client testimonials, and their approach to client communication.

Preservation of Faulty Bard Hernia Mesh Products for Evidence

In hernia mesh lawsuits, preserving the defective mesh products is critical for building a strong case. Proper evidence preservation can significantly enhance the likelihood of obtaining maximum compensation. Below are key elements regarding evidence preservation related to hernia mesh litigation.

2018 Court Order for Mesh Preservation

2018 court order established guidelines for storing and preserving hernia mesh products that have been removed from patients. This order emphasizes the importance of retaining these products as evidence in potential lawsuits, ensuring that plaintiffs have tangible proof of the mesh’s defects and related complications.

Specific Documentation Needed

To support a hernia mesh lawsuit, the following documentation is essential:

  • Medical Records: Complete records of the initial hernia repair surgery and any subsequent revision surgeries.
  • Surgical Reports: Detailed reports from the surgeon regarding the implantation and removal of the mesh.
  • Imaging Studies: X-rays, MRIs, or CT scans that may indicate complications such as mesh migration or perforation.
  • Adverse Event Reports: Any documentation related to complications experienced post-surgery.

Steps to Preserve Surgical Records

  1. Coordinate with Medical Team: Before undergoing revision surgery, communicate with your healthcare provider about preserving the old hernia mesh.
  2. Request Copies: Obtain copies of all relevant medical records, including surgical notes and imaging studies, as soon as possible.
  3. Document Mesh Removal: Ensure that the removed mesh is properly labeled and stored according to the court’s guidelines.
  4. Legal Consultation: Work with a legal team experienced in hernia mesh litigation to collect and preserve all necessary evidence.

Why Evidence Preservation is Crucial for Maximum Compensation

  • Strengthens Your Case: Preserved evidence can provide concrete proof of the defective nature of the mesh and its role in causing complications.
  • Facilitates Legal Arguments: Having tangible evidence allows attorneys to build stronger legal arguments regarding negligence and liability.
  • Increases Settlement Potential: Cases with well-preserved evidence are more likely to result in favorable settlements, as they demonstrate the harm caused by the product.

Preserving evidence of defective hernia mesh products is vital for patients seeking compensation for their injuries. By following proper documentation procedures and coordinating with medical and legal teams, patients can enhance their chances of a successful outcome in their lawsuits.

If you have experienced complications from hernia mesh implants, consider consulting with a qualified attorney to discuss your rights and options.

Hernia Mesh Dangers and Product Recalls

As claimed by the FDA, the Bard CruraSoft Patch is a new soft tissue repair product with a dual-sided Bard CruraSoft Patch with specially designed PTFE mesh on one side to reinforce soft tissue [12].

On the other side, an ePTFE patch minimizes adhesions to the prosthesis. The Bard CruraSoft patch is explicitly designed to repair the hiatal defect during laparoscopic fundoplications and paraesophageal hernia procedures.

In December 2005, C.R. Bard issued a recall after it had learned of the serious product defects [13].

Several months later, in March 2006, after 31 more ring breaks were reported—20 of which caused patient injury—the C.R. Bard recall was expanded to include several additional products and lot numbers, including the C.R. Bard large oval patches, the C Qur mesh, Bard Sepramesh, the extra large oval patches, and the large circle surgical mesh.

FDA Recall Timeline

The FDA has been monitoring hernia mesh products closely due to numerous adverse event reports. Key points in the recall timeline include:

  • 2005: Initial Reports of Defects
    The FDA began receiving reports of defects and complications associated with various hernia mesh products.
  • December 2005: First Recall
    The first recall of a hernia mesh product occurred, marking the beginning of a series of recalls due to safety concerns.
  • March 2006: Expanded Recall
    Following the initial recall, the FDA expanded the recall to include additional products identified as defective or dangerous.
  • 2018: Safety Warnings and Recalls
    The FDA issues a warning regarding multiple hernia mesh products, including Bard’s Crurasoft patch, citing serious health risks such as bowel obstruction and perforation. This year also sees an increase in adverse event reports, with the FDA averaging more than 500 monthly reports related to surgical mesh.
  • 2023: Increased Adverse Event Reports
    The FDA receives over 55,000 adverse event reports on hernia mesh devices, highlighting ongoing safety concerns and prompting further scrutiny of these products. Recent reports indicate over 100 problems, including several involving death due to complications associated with defective hernia mesh products.

Impact on Lawsuits

The timeline of FDA actions has significantly impacted ongoing lawsuits against manufacturers of hernia mesh products.

Key effects include:
  • Increased Awareness: The series of recalls and warnings has heightened awareness among patients regarding the potential risks associated with hernia mesh implants.
  • Strengthened Cases: Plaintiffs can leverage the documented history of defects and recalls in their lawsuits, providing evidence that manufacturers were aware of the risks but failed to act adequately.
  • Settlement Negotiations: The ongoing scrutiny from the FDA may influence settlement negotiations, as manufacturers may seek to resolve claims to avoid further legal repercussions.

The timeline of FDA actions regarding hernia mesh products underscores the importance of regulatory oversight in ensuring patient safety. For individuals affected by these devices, understanding this timeline is crucial for navigating potential legal claims.

If you or someone you know has experienced complications related to hernia mesh implants, it is advisable to consult with a qualified attorney to explore your legal options and ensure your rights are protected.

Breaking Down MDLs: A Closer Look at Consolidating Complex Lawsuit

Hernia mesh lawsuits have led to significant legal actions across multiple jurisdictions, notably in Rhode Island and Ohio. Below is a comprehensive overview of the MDLs in these states, including the current number of cases, average settlement amounts, timelines for resolution, and the benefits of joining an MDL.

Rhode Island MDL

Rhode Island is considered one of the most favorable jurisdictions for plaintiffs in hernia mesh lawsuits against C.R. Bard.

The Rhode Island MDL consolidates cases at the state level, allowing for streamlined proceedings and a focus on local laws.

  • Current Number of Cases: As of January 2025, approximately 24,099 cases have been filed in the Rhode Island MDL.
  • Average Settlement Amounts: The average settlement for Bard hernia mesh claims in Rhode Island is estimated to be between $60,000 and $100,000, although individual results may vary based on case specifics.
  • Timeline for Resolution: The resolution process is ongoing, with recent developments indicating a significant global settlement agreement reached in October 2024. This agreement aims to resolve most claims efficiently.

Ohio MDL

The Bard/Davol Multidistrict Litigation is pending in the Federal Court for the Southern District of Ohio. This MDL focuses on all claims related to Bard’s polypropylene plastic hernia mesh products.

  • Current Number of Cases: As of January 2025, approximately 38,000 cases have been consolidated in the Ohio MDL.
  • Average Settlement Amounts: Similar to Rhode Island, average settlements in Ohio are also estimated between $60,000 and $100,000, depending on the severity of injuries and other factors.
  • Timeline for Resolution: The Ohio MDL has seen significant progress with several bellwether trials conducted. A mediation process is currently underway to expedite resolution for pending cases.

Benefits of Joining an MDL

  1. Streamlined Process: Joining an MDL allows plaintiffs to benefit from a centralized legal process that can lead to faster resolutions compared to individual lawsuits.
  2. Shared Resources: Plaintiffs share the costs of litigation, including expert witnesses and legal fees, which can make pursuing a claim more financially feasible.
  3. Increased Leverage: The collective strength of numerous plaintiffs can provide more leverage against large corporations like Bard, potentially leading to higher settlement amounts.
  4. Access to Bellwether Trials: Participation in an MDL may allow plaintiffs to benefit from bellwether trials that help gauge potential outcomes and influence settlement negotiations.
  5. Legal Expertise: Plaintiffs gain access to experienced attorneys who specialize in hernia mesh litigation and understand the complexities involved in these cases.

The ongoing MDLs in Rhode Island and Ohio represent significant avenues for individuals seeking compensation for injuries related to Bard hernia mesh products.

With thousands of cases consolidated and recent settlement agreements reached, affected individuals are encouraged to consult legal professionals to explore their options within these structured litigations.

Jury Orders BD to Pay $4.8 Million in Hernia Mesh Bellwether Trial

According to Reuters, Becton, Dickinson, and Co’s C.R. Bard Inc. subsidiary was ordered to pay a record $4.8 million in a hernia mesh lawsuit filed by a Hawaii man who claimed he suffered serious complications after receiving the company’s hernia repair mesh [14].

The verdict for Plaintiff Paul Trevino and his wife Earlynn in Providence state court came after a month-long bellwether trial.

Trevino alleged in his 2018 lawsuit that the so-called Ventralex hernia repair mesh, made of the plastic polypropylene, burrowed into his tissue, causing pain and inflammation and ultimately requiring corrective surgery, Reuters said. The Trevinos’ case was the first to go to trial in the state litigation.

What is Hernia Repair?

According to a Harvard Medical School 2023 study, hernia repair is a surgical procedure used to fix a hernia [15]. The procedure is also referred to as a herniorrhaphy mesh implant.

A hernia occurs when part of an internal organ protrudes into a part of the body where it should not (most commonly in the abdominal area).

A small portion of the intestine, or a piece of fat, pokes through a weak area in the muscular wall of the abdomen. This causes an abnormal bulge under the skin of the abdomen, usually near the groin or navel.

In addition to patch recalls, the FDA recalled some of the parent company Salute devices and warned that Davol was seriously violating the law and that they could take further regulatory steps without notice, including inventory seizure, injunctions preventing product sale, or monetary penalties.

In all, Kugel Mesh Hernia Patches have been recalled three times by the FDA, and nearly 100 reports of problems related to the patch have been received, several of which involve death.

Hernia Mesh Settlement Value

As stated above, there is a massive amount of prior litigation over hernia mesh and other types of mesh used in surgeries in other parts of the body. Many of the problems with hernia mesh implants centered around their incompatibility with the human immune system.

After being implanted, the devices triggered an immune system attack which caused severe health complications. Another problem was that the outer coating of the mesh degraded too quickly, causing the mesh to attach to other organs or tissues.

However, awards in hernia mesh claims depend on the specifics of each case – the severity of the plaintiff’s injuries, the strength of the case, and the seriousness of the damage caused by the defective mesh.

Some manufacturers may represent large corporations that have deep pockets, but it is impossible to say exactly what the average settlement value will be.

Pursuing Compensation in a Bard Hernia Mesh Lawsuit

Across the U.S., lawsuits have been filed against C.R. Bard and other hernia mesh manufacturers alleging that their products were defectively designed, leading to adverse health complications after being used as directed. These firms have also been accused of failing to warn patients of potential risks and adverse side effects.

Similar to product liability lawsuits, damages in a hernia mesh lawsuit bellwether trial can include medical bills, lost wages, pain and suffering, emotional distress, loss of enjoyment of life, and loss of consortium (compensatory damages).

Punitive damages are a separate type of damages that can be obtained in a hernia mesh lawsuit. These are awarded as punishment against a corporation, typically for acts like knowingly hiding risks, purposely failing to warn patients and doctors, and deliberately avoiding FDA regulations.

A hernia mesh attorney at Schmidt & Clark, LLP, can help you estimate what your case could be worth.

FAQs

How do I know if my hernia patch implant is defective?

Symptoms of a defective hernia patch implant may include severe abdominal pain, fever, swelling, redness, infection at the surgical site, bowel obstruction, and recurrence of the hernia. Consult with a healthcare provider if you experience any of these symptoms.

What evidence is needed to support a hernia patch lawsuit?

Evidence includes medical records documenting the implantation and complications, proof of the specific type of hernia patch used, expert medical testimony linking the patch to the complications, and documentation of related expenses and losses.

What compensation can be sought in a Bard Crurasoft Hernia Patch lawsuit?

Compensation can include medical expenses, lost wages, pain and suffering, emotional distress, and costs for additional surgeries or treatments. In some cases, punitive damages may also be awarded if gross negligence is proven.

Can I join a class-action lawsuit for hernia patch complications?

Yes, if a class-action lawsuit is filed, affected individuals may be able to join. Contact a lawyer to discuss joining the class action or filing an individual claim.

Related Articles:

See all related medical device lawsuits our attorneys covered so far.

Choose our lawyers

Have you or a loved one suffered severe pain or injury from a defective medical device?

Get a Free Bard Crurasoft Hernia Patch Lawsuit Evaluation With Our Lawyers

The Product Liability Litigation Group at Schmidt & Clark, LLP law firm is an experienced team of bellwether trial lawyers that focus on the representation of plaintiffs in hernia mesh repair lawsuits. We are handling individual litigation nationwide and currently accepting new injury and death cases in all 50 states.

Free Case Evaluation: Again, if you have problems following hernia surgery, you should contact our law firm immediately. You may be entitled to a hernia mesh settlement by filing a hernia mesh lawsuit and we can help with jury awards.

References:

  1. https://www.schmidtandclark.com/wp-content/uploads/2018-11-12-Bryan-Complaint.pdf
  2. https://www.americanbar.org/groups/young_lawyers/resources/tyl/practice-areas/mdl-vs-class-action-place-plaintiffs-and-procedure/
  3. https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/nursing-and-health-professions/surgical-mesh
  4. https://www.fda.gov/medical-devices/implants-and-prosthetics/surgical-mesh-used-hernia-repair
  5. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9995439/
  6. https://misuse.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/error/abuse.shtml
  7. https://misuse.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/error/abuse.shtml#REF4
  8. https://misuse.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/error/abuse.shtml
  9. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9021144/
  10. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7260408/
  11. https://www.consumernotice.org/drugs-and-devices/hernia-mesh/
  12. https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/cfdocs/cfpmn/pmn.cfm?ID=K022350
  13. https://www.inspire.com/groups/agmd-gi-motility/discussion/recall-of-bard-crurasoft-patch-type-mesh/
  14. https://www.reuters.com/legal/litigation/ri-jury-orders-becton-dickinson-pay-48-mln-hernia-mesh-trial-2022-08-29/
  15. https://www.health.harvard.edu/a_to_z/hernia-repair-a-to-z

Free Confidential Case Evaluation

Verified 100% Secure SiteTo contact us for a free review of your potential case, please fill out the form below or call us toll free 24 hrs/day by dialing: (866) 588-0600.