Transvaginal Mesh Lawsuit Lawyers at Wright & Schulte LLC Report on Recent Ruling Allowing Ohio Vaginal Mesh Lawsuit to Move Forward

Print

Boston Scientific Had Sought to Dismiss All Claims in the Ohio Vaginal Mesh Lawsuit, Asserting They Were Time-Barred Due to the Two-Year Statute of Limitations Governing Ohio Personal Injury Lawsuits.

Transvaginal-Mesh-Lawsuit-Lawyer-Attorney-InjuriesThe transvaginal mesh lawsuit lawyers at Wright & Schulte LLC, an experienced Ohio personal injury law firm, report that an Ohio federal judge has rejected Boston Scientific’s Motion to Dismiss a vaginal mesh lawsuit filed on behalf of a woman who allegedly suffered vaginal mesh complications as a result of the company’s Vesica kit vaginal sling. Court documents indicate that Judge James G. Carr ruled that the transvaginal mesh lawsuit’s claims of negligence, defective manufacture and design, marketing defect, failure to warn, and strict product liability will be allowed to move forward. Among other things, Boston Scientific has argued that the vaginal mesh lawsuit was time-barred due to the two-year statute of limitations governing Ohio personal injury lawsuits. (Case No. 3:12-cv-01080-JGC)

Wright & Schulte LLC is representing numerous women in transvaginal mesh lawsuits filed against Boston Scientific and other manufacturers. The Firm offers free vaginal mesh lawsuit evaluations to victims of vaginal mesh complications. If you or someone you love suffered serious, life-altering transvaginal mesh complications following implantation of pelvic mesh to treat pelvic organ prolapse or stress urinary incontinence, please visit yourlegalhelp.com, or call toll-FREE 1-800-399-0795 to learn more about your options for legal recourse.

Transvaginal Mesh Lawsuit

According to the Ohio vaginal mesh lawsuit, the Plaintiff had received Boston Scientific’s Vesica kit vaginal sling in 1998 to treat stress urinary incontinence. Even though she experienced a recurrence of symptoms in 2008, her physician recommended no further treatment. In 2011, however, the Plaintiff suffered vaginal bleeding, increased incontinence, and lower abdominal pain. Her doctor determined her complications were the result of extrusion of the mesh into her vaginal tissue, and the Plaintiff underwent revision surgery to remove the device, according to the complaint.

In its motion seeking dismissal, Boston Scientific asserted that the Plaintiff should have known in 2008 that her vaginal mesh complications were allegedly the result of the Vesica transvaginal mesh product, and thus her claims were time barred. But Judge Carr did not agree, pointing out in his March 27th ruling that there was nothing in her transvaginal mesh lawsuit to suggest the Plaintiff “knew enough in 2008 to connect her occasional stress incontinence with the injuries that the device, according to her complaint, ultimately caused. Moreover, her doctor was, apparently, so unconcerned that he did nothing in response to her complaints.” Judge Carr also noted that “the multiple and severe symptoms that ultimately led to removal of the device did not manifest themselves until July, 2011.”
According to Wright & Schulte LLC, the Ohio transvaginal mesh lawsuit is just one of thousands of such claims pending against Boston Scientific and other medical device manufactures in courts around the country that have been filed on behalf of women who allegedly suffered serious vaginal mesh complications. Five consolidated litigations involving vaginal mesh lawsuits are currently underway in U.S. District Court, Southern District of West Virginia, including:

  • In re: American Medical Systems, Inc., Pelvic Repair Systems Products Liability Litigation
    (MDL No. 2325)
  • In re: Boston Scientific Corp., Pelvic Repair System Products Liability Litigation (MDL No.
    2326);
  • In re: C.R. Bard, Inc., Pelvic Repair Systems Products Liability Litigation (MDL No. 2187)
  • In re: Ethicon, Inc., Pelvic Repair System Products Liability Litigation (MDL No. 2327); and
  • In Re: Coloplast Corp. Pelvic Support System Products Liability Litigation (MDL No. 2387)

Last month, a New Jersey Superior Court jury weighing claims in the nation’s first vaginal mesh lawsuit involving an Ethicon transvaginal mesh device awarded more than $11 million in compensatory and punitive damages to a recipient of the Gynecare Prolift device. Prior to that, a California jury awarded $5.5 million to a woman who claimed to have suffered serious injuries from a C.R. Bard transvaginal mesh product
[bloomberg.com/news/2013-02-28/j-j-owes-7-76-million-in-punitives-in-vaginal-mesh-case.html]
[bloomberg.com/news/2012-07-24/bard-must-pay-5-5-million-over-vaginal-mesh-implants.html]

About Wright & Schulte LLC

Wright & Schulte LLC, a defective medical device law firm, is dedicated to the belief that America’s legal system should work for the people. Every day, the attorneys of Wright & Schulte LLC stand up for the rights of people who have been injured or wronged by defective drugs and their side effects, complications from defective medical devices, and unsafe consumer products, and fight tirelessly to ensure that even the world’s most powerful corporations take responsibility for their actions. If you’re looking for a law firm that will guarantee the aggressive and personal representation you deserve, please do not hesitate to contact Wright & Schulte LLC today. Free case evaluations are available through yourlegalhelp.com, or call 1-800-399-0795.

This entry was posted in Wright & Schulte LLC News. Bookmark the permalink.