The polypropylene hernia mesh that has allegedly caused serious injuries may have future claims in a centralized Bard hernia mesh lawsuit.
Many plaintiffs have filed a Bard hernia mesh lawsuit after suffering what they allege are serious injuries about which they should have been warned well in advance.
Centralization of the separate hernia mesh claims may help with the discovery process and the management of multiple cases.
Any plaintiff who has filed a hernia mesh lawsuit may be interested in the possible consolidation of the polypropylene hernia mesh lawsuits against C.R. Bard.
Most of the plaintiffs who have already filed a Bard hernia mesh lawsuit say that they had experienced debilitating and painful complications. If the Bard hernia mesh lawsuit consolidation is approved, this would mean that all these lawsuits would be managed under one U.S. District Judge.
A minimum of 60 product liability lawsuits have already been filed against Bard in U.S. District Courts across the country. Many of these include similar claims that the polypropylene material used in the hernia mesh was defective and unreasonably dangerous. The plaintiffs who have chosen to file a Bard hernia mesh lawsuit say that these products are much more likely to fail and cause revision surgery which carries its own set of risks..
Hernia mesh injury attorneys have continued to file claims and investigate allegations against C.R. Bard for painful side effects. It is anticipated that hundreds or even thousands of plaintiffs may continue to file a Bard hernia mesh lawsuit in the coming years.
In early April, one group of plaintiffs filed a motion to transfer through the U.S. Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation which would centralize all of the Bard PerFix and Bard Ventrilex lawsuits into the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Ohio. The primaryĀ purpose of consolidating these legal claims is designed to avoid conflicting rulings in pretrial stages and to minimize duplicated discovery issues.
This would also serve for the convenience of the parties involved, the witnesses and the court. Many other polypropylene hernia mesh cases have already been filed, affecting other companies as well, including Ethicon’s physio mesh and the Atrium C-QUR patch.. These have been centralized in two separate multidistrict litigations.
These hernia mesh injury lawsuits allege that the companies knew about the severe risks or would have discovered these risks upon appropriate testing and in failing to warn the public about the dangers, exposed plaintiffs to unnecessary and severe injuries and problems.
Far too many patients have become aware of the problems only after the fact, ultimately suffering the consequences in the form of serious injuries.
If you have been affected by a Bard hernia mesh product, consult with the experienced attorneys at McDonald Worley today to walk through your legal options.
Disclaimer: McDonald Worley is not representing the plaintiff in this lawsuit.