vaginal mesh

Stanford Law Experts on Johnson & Johnson Product Liability Exposure

Johnson & Johnson is facing tens of thousands of product liability lawsuits, involving, among other things, its antipsychotic drug Risperdal, opioids, vaginal mesh, and talcum powder.

Here, Stanford Law Professor Nora Freeman Engstrom, a tort law and complex litigation expert, and Diana Garnet Li, a student in the Stanford Law School Class of 2021, discuss the mounting product liability exposure facing the multinational giant—and how these cases may develop.

Transvaginal Mesh Verdicts and Settlements Against Manufacturers

During the past decade, juries have returned numerous verdicts against transvaginal mesh manufacturers. Plaintiffs have received millions of dollars in compensation for medical bills, injuries and emotional damage after fighting their cases in court. Transvaginal mesh makers have settled thousands of legal claims for roughly $8 billion.

The first transvaginal mesh lawsuits went to trial in 2012 and 2013. Since then, multiple transvaginal mesh producers have lost multimillion-dollar lawsuits. Many companies have agreed to large legal settlements to avoid facing plaintiffs in courtrooms, but others have delayed proceedings and settlements.

Juries have sided with numerous plaintiffs who accused companies of designing defective products, fraudulently promoting the safety of the devices and failing to warn of potential complications. Despite multiple settlements, thousands of lawsuits are still pending in federal and state courts. It’s unclear whether companies will try to resolve remaining claims or fight them.

“(Settlements are) hard to predict,” lawyer Laura Yaeger told Drugwatch. “It depends on a number of factors, including the pace of litigation, the type of cases – stress urinary incontinence (SUI) versus pelvic organ prolapse – and the strategy the defense takes.”

C.R. Bard was the first manufacturer to lose a transvaginal mesh lawsuit. The company withdrew its Avaulta Plus vaginal mesh from the market in July 2012, weeks before losing a $3.6 million verdict to a woman who experienced complications from the company’s device.

* Word-Use Disclaimer

Legal funding is not a loan. It is the non-recourse purchase of an equitable lien in a plaintiffs’ legal claim. Words such as ‘loans,’ ‘lending,’ ‘borrow,’ etc., are used for search and marketing purposes only.
More info

TriMark Legal Funding LLC
1056 Green Acres Rd #102
Eugene, OR 97408