Quantcast

Stryker Hip Implant Failures Lawsuit Allegations Update: Resource4thePeople Now Accepting Cases for Review of Alleged Metal-on-Metal Hip Implant Side Effects

June 21, 2013

Nationwide network of attorneys offering free consultations in wake of creation of a new multi-district litigation in Minnesota for Stryker lawsuits alleging that metal hip systems failed. Company cites corrosion problems in recall notice.

San Diego, CA (PRWEB) June 21, 2013

http://www.resource4thepeople.com/defectivemedicaldevices/stryker.html

Resource4thePeople announced today that its national network of attorneys is now reviewing cases in which consumers are alleging that they suffered serious side effects as a result of having Stryker metal-on-metal hip implants.

The announcement comes after a decision by federal court officials to consolidate federal lawsuits alleging that victims suffered infections and other serious side effects as a result of Stryker Rejuvenate and ABG II hip implants that failed, according to the United States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation, which created the consolidation.*

The panel summarized the plaintiffs’ claims as focusing upon the performance of these products, particularly the hip replacement devices’ propensity to cause fretting and corrosion at the modular-neck junction and fail early.

“These are serious health problems that are being alleged and our national network of attorneys are accepting these cases from consumers who may have suffered similar problems to those claimed in the Stryker metal hip implant lawsuits that have been filed so far,” said Resource4thePeople.

“The fact that a multidistrict litigation has been created and federal lawsuits assigned to it does not affect the legal rights of other consumers who may have suffered similar alleged side effects and are considering taking their own legal action.”

Resource4thePeople said that free consultations are being offered to consumers to determine their eligibility to seek compensation for alleged side effects.

“The announcement of the creation of this consolidated litigation has generated an increase in the number of inquiries we have been receiving from consumers and we will be adding additional personnel to address this increased volume,” said Resource4thePeople.

The multidistrict litigation has been designated In Re: Stryker Rejuvenate and ABG II Hip Implant Products Liability Litigation, MDL # 2441 and assigned to U.S. District Judge Donovan Frank.

“On the basis of the papers filed and the hearing session held, we find that these actions involve common questions of fact, and that centralization will serve the convenience of the parties and witnesses and promote the just and efficient conduct of the litigation,” the panel wrote in assigning the case to Judge Frank.

“The actions share factual questions concerning design, manufacture, marketing and performance of Stryker’s recalled Stryker Rejuvenate and ABG II modular-neck stems. Centralization will eliminate duplicative discovery, prevent inconsistent pretrial rulings on discovery and other issues, and conserve the resources of the parties, their counsel and the judiciary.”

Stryker recalled the two systems in July, 2012, posting on the company website** that they systems were being recalled because of severe side effects, some of which, according to allegations made in Stryker metal hip implant lawsuits can cause metallosis, in which the body can be poisoned by metal particles flaking off the systems.

Here is part of the posting:

"In June 2012, Stryker initiated a voluntary recall of its Rejuvenate and ABG II modular-neck hip stems. While modular-neck hip stems provide surgeons with an option to correct certain aspects of a patient’s anatomy and hip biomechanics, we decided to voluntarily recall these modular-neck hip systems due to the potential for fretting and corrosion at the modular-neck junction which may result in ALTR (adverse local tissue reactions), as well as possible pain and/or swelling at or around the hip."

Resource4thePeople also is offering free consultations to consumers who allegedly suffered similar side effects from DePuy Orthopaedics metal-on-metal hip implants. Those systems also have been recalled after two trials involving allegations that DePuy metal-on-metal hip implants can cause serious side effects the company has decided it will no longer sell metal-on-metal hip implants.

DePuy's parent company, Johnson & Johnson, made the announcement May 17, 2013*** after two trials in which one jury**** awarded a plaintiff $8.3 million in damages and a second trial***** in which a jury found in favor of DePuy.

Bloomberg News reported*** May 17, 2013 that company officials said the decision to halt sales was not caused by a massive 2010 recall of the company's ASR metal-on-metal hip systems or more than 10,000 lawsuits that have been filed over allegations that the systems were defectively designed.

Resource4thePeople said that the Johnson & Johnson decision to halt sales its national team of attorneys will continue to accept new cases over allegations that DePuy metal-on-metal hip implants caused serious side effects.

"The company's decision does not affect the legal rights of consumers to seek compensation for side effects that they allege were caused by metal-on-metal hip implant systems that are the subject of a huge multi-district litigation****** that is still underway," said Resource4thePeople.

In its posting, Bloomberg reported that "metal-on-metal hip sales in the U.S. and Europe plunged from 20 percent of the market in 2007 to less than 2 percent last year as doctors questioned their safety and patients filed lawsuits citing flawed products. The global hip-implant market may be $5.7 billion in 2013, according to Lawrence Biegelsen, an analyst at Wells Fargo in New York. U.S. regulators earlier this year requested extensive study of all metal-on-metal hips."

In the first U.S. trial**** involving the DePuy metal systems allegations, a Los Angeles jury found on March 8, 2013 that DePuy and its parent company, Johnson & Johnson must pay a Montana man $8.3 in damages on a finding that the DePuy ASR system was defectively designed.

Sources:

*http://www.jpml.uscourts.gov/sites/jpml/files/MDL-2441-Initial_Transfer-05-13.pdf

**stryker.com/en-us/products/Orthopaedics/modularneckstems/index.htm

***http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-05-16/j-j-will-stop-sales-of-metal-on-metal-hip-replacements.html

****Kransky v. DePuy, BC456086, California Superior Court, Los Angeles County (Los Angeles).

*****Strum v. DePuy, 2011-L-9352, Circuit Court of Cook County, Chicago, Illinois.

******In re: DePuy Orthopaedics Inc., ASR Hip Implant Products Liability Litigation, MDL-2197, U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Ohio

For the original version on PRWeb visit: http://www.prweb.com/releases/prweb2013/6/prweb10851368.htm


Source: prweb



comments powered by Disqus