North Carolina Product Liability Lawyer Blog

Articles Posted in Artificial Hip

Depuy Files Appeal of $502 Million Depuy Pinnacle Verdict

Published on: March 21, 2017 | By Clay Hodges

I will not forget my first jury trial. It was many years ago, not long after I graduated from law school, and let’s just say I was in over my head a bit. It was a simple car crash case. I represented a driver who was rear-ended and injured (but not seriously). I walked my client through his direct examination, and I thought it was going well. Then the insurance defense lawyer was given the opportunity to cross-examine my client. He asked simple questions about the severity of the injuries (“were you able to return to work a week later?”) and after eight or ten of these questions, I objected. The judge peered down at me over his reading glasses:

“Counselor?”
“Yes your honor, I object.”
“On what grounds?”
“This line of questioning is prejudicial.”
“Prejudicial?”
“Yes, your honor. I move to strike the testimony as prejudicial.”

The judge sat back in his chair. “Mr. Hodges, wouldn’t every question on cross-examination be prejudicial to your case?” This query reminded me of the complete language of Rule of Evidence 403: The court may “exclude relevant evidence if its value is substantially outweighed by a danger of . . . unfair prejudice.” I had remembered most of the rule, but not the key word: unfair. All evidence presented in any court case is supposed to be prejudicial to the other side’s case. To exclude evidence under Rule 403, the testimony must be unfairly prejudicial.

But the judge was still waiting for my answer. The jury waited too. I tried my best:
“Well, yes, your honor. But this testimony is unfairly prejudicial.” At least I had finally wedged in the key word.
“I don’t think so, counselor, objection overruled.”

Depuy ASR Artificial Hip Settlement Deadlines Extended

Published on: March 15, 2017 | By Clay Hodges

Some late-breaking news: The Depuy ASR Settlement Agreement has been extended to cover injured people who received a revision surgery after January 31, 2015. The extension was announced yesterday. Here’s how it works: if you received a Depuy ASR artificial hip, and then had revision surgery to remove the component between January 31, 2015 and February 15, 2017, you now may qualify to participate in the Settlement Agreement negotiated between plaintiffs and the defendants.

Let’s back up.

Before Yesterday, Where Were We?

Smith & Nephew Artificial Hip Problems: What’s Going On?

Published on: March 7, 2017 | By Clay Hodges

I recently blogged about artificial hip failures. Fortunately, these hip failures are not common when you look at the total number of patients receiving hip implants every year. However, when there is a failure, it can be extremely unpleasant, to put it lightly.

And it’s not just one medical device manufacturer with implants that are causing problems. Stryker, DePuy, Zimmer, and Wright are just some of the companies who have had issues with their artificial hip implants. If you’re curious, you can read more about some of them in my other blog post.

One such company that’s been in the news lately is Smith & Nephew. Over the course of the past few years, Smith & Nephew has instituted a string of recalls and is now at the beginning of a potentially expensive legal fight, with even more lawsuits expected. So what exactly is going on with Smith & Nephew’s artificial hip implants?

How Do I Know If I Have the Recalled Stryker LFIT V40 Femoral Head Implanted?

Published on: January 26, 2017 | By Clay Hodges

I imagine it can seem overwhelming. Let’s say you had artificial hip surgery in 2011. By 2016 you begin to feel some unusual, new pain. So you Google artificial hip implants and you discover an ocean of words on the many failed artificial hip components that have been sold and implanted (and then failed) over the past decade. Then you run across an article on an urgent recall of the Stryker LFIT Anatomic CoCr V40 Femoral Head (let’s call it the V40 Head). You have a vague recollection that you were implanted with a Stryker artificial hip back in 2011, but you certainly don’t know if the V40 Head was implanted. So the question for a person like you would be: How do I know if I have the Stryker LFIT Head implanted in my body?

It’s a great question. In fact, you should not be expected to know what precise artificial hip components have been implanted in your body. I had cataract surgery last year, and I don’t have any idea what exact artificial lenses were implanted in my eyes. I hope I don’t ever have to figure out what product they actually are. But back to you. Here is a simple procedure you should follow if you need to find out if a medical device like the V40 Head is currently implanted in your body:

Depuy Pinnacle Hip Trial: Judge Slashes Jury Award by $500 Million

Published on: January 5, 2017 | By Clay Hodges

Imagine going to sleep the night after making the decision to strip five hundred million dollars from six families. I imagine it would be unsettling. On Tuesday, Judge Ed Kinkeade, a federal judge in Texas overseeing the Depuy Pinnacle MDL, made the decision to cut $500,000,000.00 from a jury award presented to six families after a grueling ten-week trial last fall. You can read about the trial and the jury’s verdict here. In that post I wrote that the jury’s verdict was “staggering,” and it was. It may be more staggering that a judge, less than a month later, would wipe out half a billion dollars of the jury’s award.

“Single-Digit Multipliers”

On January 3, 2017, Judge Kinkeade issued his post-trial court order reducing the amount of punitive damages awarded to the six families, writing that “constitutional considerations limit the amount a plaintiff may recover in punitive damages.” The relevant portion of the Order states:

Depuy Pinnacle Hip Trial: Jury Awards ONE BILLION DOLLARS

Published on: December 2, 2016 | By Clay Hodges

Staggering. It’s really the only word for it. Yesterday a Texas jury awarded six plaintiffs over one billion dollars for injuries sustained following the failure of the Depuy Pinnacle metal-on-metal artificial hip. And that comes out to more than $170,000,000.00 per plaintiff. The verdict was handed down last night following ten weeks of punishing trial.

This trial was the third “bellwether” case in the Depuy Pinnacle MDL (multidistrict litigation). The first Pinnacle bellwether trial ended in a defense verdict, which means the jury did not find negligence on the part of the defendants, Depuy Orthopaedics and Johnson & Johnson, and therefore the plaintiffs received no compensation. The second bellwether trial resulted in a huge $502 million dollar verdict for five plaintiffs, which I wrote about here. In fact, much of the speculation about this third bellwether trial was whether the plaintiffs’ team could put on the same powerful case that they did in the second bellwether trial, or whether the $500 million verdict in March was simply a bizarre outlier, one of those remarkable unicorn verdicts that come along once and never again.

Today, the $500 million dollar verdict seems modest compared to yesterday’s jury verdict. Plainly, juries are sending a huge message to Depuy and J&J that they hurt many people when they marketed and sold the Depuy Pinnacle Hip.

Wright Medical Artificial Hip Settlement: Wrong for Plaintiffs?

Published on: November 22, 2016 | By Clay Hodges

Do you long for the days when you could move your legs and hips with complete freedom of motion in total silence, without pain? If the answer is “yes,” there’s a good chance you are the recipient of a hip replacement implant – and you wouldn’t be alone. Over the past few decades, millions of individuals have received hip replacement surgeries, many of which have been successful. But in recent years, there have been a large number of hip replacement recipients who have suffered problems with their hip implants, especially those receiving metal-on-metal hip replacements.

Lawsuits have been filed, resulting in large, eye-catching verdicts and settlements for plaintiffs. One recent settlement applies to approximately 1,300 lawsuits involving hip implant products made by Wright Medical Technology (“Wright”).

Wright Hip Background

How Long Will It Take to Resolve My Artificial Hip Lawsuit?

Published on: November 8, 2016 | By Clay Hodges

I got a desperate phone call the other day. The call came from a man several states away. Let’s call him “Bill.” Bill had hip replacement surgery in 2007. The Depuy ASR artificial hip was implanted. He began to suffer pain eighteen months later, in early 2009, and blood tests showed his cobalt and chromium metal levels were rising at an alarming rate. He was suffering from metallosis. In 2011 Bill underwent Revision Surgery to remove the Depuy ASR hip. A year later he hired an attorney and filed his product liability lawsuit against Depuy Orthopaedics and Johnson & Johnson (the parent company of Depuy) in federal court in Bill’s home state. From there, the case was transferred to the Depuy ASR MDL in the Northern District of Ohio, before Judge David Katz. Judge Katz was the federal judge assigned to handle or manage the pretrial issues associated with the thousands of Depuy ASR cases that were transferred to his court after being filed across the country.

In November 2013, the first Settlement was reached between the Plaintiffs’ Committee and the Defense Team for Depuy and J&J. I have written about this Settlement and its terms here. So six years after the Original Surgery, and four years after the first onset of pain, and two years after Revision Surgery, Bill finally had the opportunity to accept the settlement offer or reject the offer and pursue a jury trial on his specific case. After much deliberation, Bill rejected the settlement offer.

Three years have now passed. Bill’s case is not on a trial calendar. In fact, as far as I am aware no case has yet been tried of any person who rejected the settlement offers. To make matters worse, this summer Judge Katz, in charge of the MDL, passed away. A new judge had to be appointed to take his place overseeing the MDL.

Bill is at his wit’s end. He told me he merely wants his day in court. He is now nine years removed from the Original Surgery, seven years removed from the onset of symptoms, five years from Revision Surgery, and over four years from filing suit. And still no trial date in sight.

Bill is not alone. Hundreds of people in the MDL rejected the settlement. And those people are waiting too.

So how long does it take to resolve your artificial hip case?

Stryker LFIT V40 Artificial Hip Recall: What You Need to Know

Published on: October 31, 2016 | By Clay Hodges

Total hip replacements are becoming more popular. Between 2000 and 2010, the number of individuals aged 45 years and older receiving total hip replacements more than doubled, rising from 138,700 to 310,800. One of the reasons for the increase is a result of medical and technological advancements in hip replacement surgery and artificial hip components.

Unfortunately, not all artificial hips have performed as intended, resulting in serious complications for many patients. I have written often about failed artificial hips on this site. One such example has occurred with the Stryker Orthopaedics’ (Stryker) LFIT V40 femoral head. On August 29, 2016, Stryker issued a voluntary recall for this particular hip replacement product. If you or someone you know may have received this hip replacement product, there are certain things you need to know.

What’s Being Recalled?

This isn’t the first time Stryker has had a problem with its hip replacement products. Back in 2012, Stryker recalled its Rejuvenate and ABG II modular-neck hip stems. However, the current recall concerns the LFIT Anatomic CoCr V40 Femoral Head (V40 femoral head).

The recall focuses not on the entire hip replacement prosthesis, but rather just the femoral head; the femoral head is the “ball” part of the hip replacement. This femoral head fits inside the “cup” (which is located in the pelvis) and is also attached to the “stem” (which is connected to the femur, or thigh bone). Neither the cup nor the stem are currently a part of this recall.

Depuy Pinnacle Hip: Third Bellwether Trial Underway in Texas

Published on: October 7, 2016 | By Clay Hodges

The latest Depuy Pinnacle Hip bellwether trial is underway in Dallas, Texas. All bellwether trials are important, but this one is more important than most. After all, this trial follows an astonishing result in the second bellwether trial, where a jury awarded five plaintiffs more than $500,000,000.00 in damages for injuries caused by the Depuy Pinnacle hip. More about that case in a moment. But this third bellwether trial is critically important to Depuy and Johnson & Johnson (the Depuy Pinnacle manufacturers) who desperately need a court victory after the second bellwether trial. Another large verdict for the plaintiffs will most likely change the fate of any global settlement with the eight thousand plaintiffs who still have cases against Depuy and Johnson & Johnson.

Third Depuy Pinnacle Bellwether Trial

Judge Kinkeade, the federal judge in Texas overseeing the Depuy Pinnacle multidistrict litigation, selected seven individual cases to be consolidated in the current bellwether trial. The plaintiffs are Marvin Andrews, Kathleen Davis, Sandra Llamas, Rosa Metzler, Judith Rodriguez, Lisa Standerfer, and Michael Weiser. All the plaintiffs are from California. Their cases were transferred to the Depuy Pinnacle MDL in Dallas, Texas.

Initial Consultation919-546-8788

★★★★★

I was involved in a case for the faulty hip replacements. Clay Hodges represented me. I can't say enough about how much he has helped me. Clay was able to win multiple settlements on my behalf with most of them being the maximum amount able to be awarded. Matt J.

Clay, thank you sir for making a disheartening experience at least palatable, you and your staff were honest, caring and understanding through the entire process of my wife’s hip replacements, while monetary settlements never make the pain and suffering end, it sometimes is the only way people can fight back to right a wrong. J. V.

We are absolutely pleased with how Clay Hodges handled my husband’s hip replacement claim. He always kept us informed of the progress. And, his work resulted in a settlement which we are extremely pleased. Thank you, Clay! Carol L. & Norm L.