Johnson & Johnson & Ethicon Transvaginal Mesh Case — Update

Johnson & Johnson & Ethicon Transvaginal Mesh Case — Update

In April of 2018, an Indiana jury found Johnson & Johnson and Ethicon, a subsidiary of Johnson & Johnson, liable to Barbara Kaiser, an Indiana native, for injuries sustained after Barbara was implanted with the Prolift transvaginal mesh, a product of Johnson & Johnson, and experienced severe discomfort, pain, and injuries. Aside from such discomfort and pain, she specifically experienced “permanent injury that required corrective surgery after her doctor implanted her” with the transvaginal mesh.

A transvaginal mesh, or pelvic mesh, is an implant used to treat pelvic organ prolapse and stress urinary incontinence in women.

The jury found Johnson & Johnson and Ethicon to be negligent in the design and marketing (misleading the general public about the risks involved) of the pelvic mesh and found them liable for $10 million in compensatory damages and $25 million in punitive damages. An Indiana federal judge brought down the punitive damages amount to $10 million. Barbara Kaiser will receive $20 million in compensatory and punitive damages.

Barbara, and her husband Anton, sought the expert legal help of Thomas O. Plouff, (Of Counsel to Costello, McMahon, Burke & Murphy, LTD, Chicago)  Plouff stated:

Ethicon defended an indefensible product and the jury stood up for Barb Kaiser. We thank them for their service.  We are thrilled to help a remarkable woman  who suffered at the hands of a corporation who put profits over patient safety.

0

Related Posts

Ethicon in Hot Water…

Ethicon, Inc. is a subsidiary of Johnson & Johnson that primarily sells women's health products. Part of their product lineup includes Gynecare Prolift transvaginal mesh kits, and these are the…
Read more

Why Women From Chicago,…

Ethicon Inc., a subsidiary of parent company Johnson & Johnson, is being served with court papers in record numbers, as more and more women are bringing to light the adverse…
Read more

How to thread the…

Often plaintiff attorneys decide on medical device cases by taking ones where the FDA has not made a safety and efficacy determination under 510(k), and declining cases where the device…
Read more