FREE Case Review (866) 588-0600

Transvaginal Mesh Litigation

Transvaginal mesh litigation has recently been mounting in courthouses around the country against Johnson & Johnson, Bard, American Medical Systems, and Boston Scientific.

Transvaginal mesh litigation has recently been mounting in courthouses around the country against Johnson & Johnson, Bard, American Medical Systems (AMS), and Boston Scientific. Lawsuits filed against these companies claim they were negligent in their handling of transvaginal mesh devices, and for their failure to warn both the public and medical communities about the health risks linked to the products. Potential transvaginal mesh complications include erosion, infections, pain, dyspareunia, organ perforation, and the recurrence of urinary problems.

Free Confidential Case Evaluation: If you or a loved one has been injured or suspect that you may have complications directly linked to the placement of a vaginal mesh product, you should contact our law firm immediately. You may be entitled to compensation by filing a suit against the manufacturer of the transvaginal mesh and we can help.

Update: New Jersey Jury Awards Plaintiff $68 Million in Bard Mesh Lawsuit

April 20, 2018 – A jury in Bergen County, New Jersey, has awarded $68 million ($33 million in compensatory damages and $35 million in punitive damages) to a woman who claims she was severely injured by C.R. Bard’s Avaulta Solo Support and Align Trans-Obturator Urethral Support Systems. Plaintiff Mary McGuinness was awarded $23 million in actual damages and her husband Thomas was awarded $10 million for loss of consortium, according to court documents.

Bard Transvaginal Mesh Lawsuit

In July 2012, medical technology giant C.R. Bard and a doctor were ordered to $5.5 million in damages over a transvaginal mesh device that caused a woman persistent pain and potentially irreversible injuries. Jurors in the case ultimately determined that plaintiffs Christine Scott and her husband deserved the compensation because of severe complications caused by Bard’s Avaulta Plus surgical mesh product. The company was ruled to be 60% at fault for Scott’s complications while Dr. Tillakarasi Kannappan, the doctor who performed the surgery, was responsible for the other 40% of the liability. The groundbreaking case was the first to go to trial among a massive number of similar complaints alleging that mesh devices made by Bard, J&J, and Boston Scientific caused plaintiffs catastrophic injuries.

Vaginal Mesh Multidistrict Litigation

Five multidistrict litigations (MDLs) have been established for pretrial handling of mesh lawsuits filed on the federal level. They are for:

          • Bard Avaulta Lawsuits (In Re: C.R. Bard, Inc., Pelvic Repair System Products Liability Litigation – MDL No. 2187)
          • AMS Vaginal Mesh Lawsuits (In Re: American Medical Systems, Inc., Pelvic Repair Systems Products Liability Litigation – MDL No. 2325)
          • Boston Scientific Transvaginal Mesh Lawsuits (In Re: Boston Scientific Corp., Pelvic Repair Systems Products Liability Litigation – MDL No. 2326)
          • Ethicon Gynecare Vaginal Mesh Lawsuits (In Re:Ethicon, Inc. Pelvic Repair Systems Products Liability Litigation – MDL No. 2327)
          • Coloplast Vaginal Sling Lawsuits (In Re: Coloplast Corp. Pelvic Support Systems Products Liability Litigation – MDL No. 2387)
          • Cook Medical Transvaginal Mesh Lawsuits (In Re: Cook Medical, Inc., Pelvic Repair System Products Liability Litigation – MDL No. 2440)
          • Neomedic Mesh Lawsuits (In Re: Neomedic Pelvic Repair System Products Liability Litigation – MDL No. 2511)

Schmidt & Clark, LLP, is accepting potential transvaginal mesh litigation against these manufacturers for the following devices:

      • Johnson & Johnson
      • Ethicon TVT
      • Gynecare TVT
      • Gynemesh PS
      • Prolene Polypropylene Mesh Patch
      • Secur

Bard

      • Avaulta Plus™ BioSynthetic Support System
      • Avaulta Solo™ Synthetic Support System
      • Faslata® Allograft
      • Pelvicol® Tissue
      • PelviSoft® Biomesh
      • Pelvitex™ Polypropylene Mesh

American Medical Systems (AMS)

      • SPARC®

Boston Scientific

      • Advantage™ Sling System
      • Obtryx® Curved Single
      • Obtryx® Mesh Sling
      • Prefyx Mid U™ Mesh Sling System
      • Prefyx PPS™ System

Do I Qualify for Transvaginal Mesh Litigation?

The Medical Device Litigation Group at our law firm is an experienced team of trial lawyers that focus on the representation of plaintiffs in transvaginal mesh litigation. We are handling individual litigation nationwide and currently accepting new transvaginal mesh litigation in all 50 states.

Free Transvaginal Mesh Litigation Evaluation: If you or a loved one has been injured or suspect that you may have complications directly linked to POP or SUI surgery and/or the placement of a transvaginal mesh product, contact our law firm immediately. You may be entitled to compensation by filing a transvaginal mesh suit and our lawyers can help.

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.
*
*
*

Awards & recognition