A month-long jury trial against
Johnson & Johnson’s Ethicon subsidiary ended badly last week for the mega-corporation
(Gross v. Gynecare Inc., Superior Court of Atlantic County, New Jersey,
Atl-L-6966-10). A New Jersey jury came out with a $3.35 million verdict in
favor of the plaintiff and hit the company for $7.76 million in punitive
damages.
The case was tried in Atlantic City over J&J’s Gynecare Prolift vaginal mesh implant. J&J is the world’s largest seller of healthcare products. The New Jersey transvaginal mesh lawsuit is one of 1,800 pending against J&J and its Ethicon division in a multicounty litigation underway in Atlantic County Superior Court. There are approximately 2,000 cases nationwide in various US district federal courts, while most are consolidated in West Virginia.
The case was tried in Atlantic City over J&J’s Gynecare Prolift vaginal mesh implant. J&J is the world’s largest seller of healthcare products. The New Jersey transvaginal mesh lawsuit is one of 1,800 pending against J&J and its Ethicon division in a multicounty litigation underway in Atlantic County Superior Court. There are approximately 2,000 cases nationwide in various US district federal courts, while most are consolidated in West Virginia.
The Plaintiff, Linda Gross,
recounted from the stand that her life since receiving Ethicon’s Gynecare
Prolift device as being a “living hell.” Despite undergoing 18 corrective
surgeries, the 47-year-old former nurse from South Dakota said she is unable to
sit or stand for long periods of time without feeling pain. In urging the jury
to award punitive damages, the Plaintiffs’ attorneys said Johnson & Johnson
was a “big giant” and jurors must send a “loud message” to punish the company
for its conduct, according to Bloomberg.
The $3.35 million compensatory damage verdict in favor of Ms.
Gross includes economic loss, pain and suffering, and more. Under New Jersey
state law, punitive damages are capped at five times the compensatory damages. Her
allegations were that J&J knew it sold a defective device despite knowing
the risk of scar and pain, organ damage and perforation.
The jury found that J&J failed to warn the plaintiff’s surgeon of the risks of its Gynecare Prolift implant and fraudulently misled her about the risks. This is the first trial involving 2,100 New Jersey lawsuits and about 2,000 cases nationwide in US District federal court, consolidated in West Virginia - all of which are over J&J’s vaginal mesh.
It is believed that J&J is worth $121 billion and has a net worth of about $65 billion. Last year it spent $21 billion on marketing and advertising alone, which translates to $57 million per day. This behemoth medical company spends $3.5 million on advertising every 45 minutes, which is the same sum that the jury awarded Linda Gross.
The jury found that J&J failed to warn the plaintiff’s surgeon of the risks of its Gynecare Prolift implant and fraudulently misled her about the risks. This is the first trial involving 2,100 New Jersey lawsuits and about 2,000 cases nationwide in US District federal court, consolidated in West Virginia - all of which are over J&J’s vaginal mesh.
It is believed that J&J is worth $121 billion and has a net worth of about $65 billion. Last year it spent $21 billion on marketing and advertising alone, which translates to $57 million per day. This behemoth medical company spends $3.5 million on advertising every 45 minutes, which is the same sum that the jury awarded Linda Gross.
J&J is also in serious legal hot water over their
subsidiary DePuy and their manufacturing of metal-on-metal hips such as the ASR
and Pinnacle. Litigation in regards to those products have both been consolidated
into MDL’s.
Transvaginal mesh devices are used to treat pelvic organ prolapse and stress urinary incontinence. They have been the subject of growing safety concerns since October 2008, when the U.S. Food & Drug Administration (FDA) issued a Public Heath Notification advising it had received more than 1,000 complaints over a three year period relating to vaginal mesh products. In July 2011, the FDA issued another alert, noting that it had received a total of 2,864 additional reports of complications. The agency concluded that serious injuries associated with surgical mesh for transvaginal repair of pelvic organ prolapse, were “not rare,” and further advised that transvaginal prolapse repair with mesh “does not improve symptomatic results or quality of life over traditional non mesh repair.”
Transvaginal mesh devices are used to treat pelvic organ prolapse and stress urinary incontinence. They have been the subject of growing safety concerns since October 2008, when the U.S. Food & Drug Administration (FDA) issued a Public Heath Notification advising it had received more than 1,000 complaints over a three year period relating to vaginal mesh products. In July 2011, the FDA issued another alert, noting that it had received a total of 2,864 additional reports of complications. The agency concluded that serious injuries associated with surgical mesh for transvaginal repair of pelvic organ prolapse, were “not rare,” and further advised that transvaginal prolapse repair with mesh “does not improve symptomatic results or quality of life over traditional non mesh repair.”
The attorneys at Pittman, Dutton & Hellums are currently
investigating claims against the manufacturers of mesh products. If you or a
loved one experienced injuries from a mesh product, please contact Booth
Samuels at booths@pittmandutton.com or
toll free at 1-866-515-8880.
