Texas Jury Returns Nearly $500M Verdict in DePuy Pinnacle Metal Hip Trial, Including $360 in Punitive Damages

Parker Waichman comments that a jury found in favor of five plaintiffs alleging failure of DePuy Orthopaedic’s metal Pinnacle hip in the second bellwether trial brought against Johnson & Johnson. The award was for approximately $130 million in compensatory and about $360 in punitive damages.

National law firm, Parker Waichman LLP, notes that a Texas jury returned a massive multi-million-dollar compensatory damage verdict in favor of five bellwether plaintiffs who alleged their DePuy Pinnacle metal-on-metal hip implant devices failed, allegedly causing significant health problems, such as bone erosion, inflammation of surrounding tissue, and metallosis (metal poisoning). The five cases that were consolidated for the bellwether are Aoki v. Johnson & Johnson Services et al., case number 3:13-cv-01071; Christopher et al v. Johnson & Johnson Services Inc. et al., case number 3:14-cv-01994; Greer v. DePuy Orthopaedics Inc. et al., case number 3:12-cv-1672; Klusmann et al v. DePuy Orthopaedics Inc. et al., case number 3:11-cv-02800; and Peterson et al v. Johnson & Johnson Services Inc. et al, case number 3:11-cv-01941, all in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas. The multidistrict (MDL) case is In re: DePuy Orthopaedics, Inc. Pinnacle Hip Implant Product Liability Litigation , case number 3:11-md-02244) in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas; U.S. District Judge Ed Kinkeade presiding.

DePuy Orthopaedics called for numerous bifurcations (requests to divide the trial in two parts so as to render a judgment on a set of legal issues without looking at all aspects), as well as more than 10 requests for mistrial. All requests were denied. The plaintiffs’ legal team was able to show that the DePuy legal team had called forth a paid expert that had earned over $900,000 by consulting for the defendants. Following jury selection, the trial lasted two months of trial days, followed by days of deliberations.

According to a Law 360 report dated March 17, 2016, Judge Kinkeade, who is presiding over this bellwether trial and the MDL, ruled on January 8, 2016 that these five cases had significant common issues that should be consolidated for trial. All five plaintiffs underwent similar Pinnacle implant surgeries, “their doctors received similar warnings, and the patients all alleged similar injuries, according to his ruling.” http://www.law360.com/productliability/articles/770595?nl_pk=0ee6b28a-4da5-4801-895d-80b669313899&utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=productliability

“Parker Waichman is delighted that the plaintiffs in this case saw justice for the pain and injuries they suffered associated with the Pinnacle metal hip implants,” said Jerrold S. Parker, founder of Parker Waichman LLP. “The firm is pleased to see the DePuy Pinnacle litigation move forward.”

J&J has already faced litigation over its metal-on-metal ASR hip, which was recalled in August 2010. In this DePuy Pinnacle bellwether, five plaintiffs allege DePuy Orthopaedics, an orthopedic unit at Johnson & Johnson, failed to warn that the Pinnacle could cause problems such as pain, implant loosening, tissue damage, and metal poisoning. As the name suggests, metal-on-metal hip implants consist of all-metal surfaces. When the devices first hit the market they were touted as being more durable and better suited for younger, more active patients. In recent years, the safety of the metal-on-metal hip implants has been called into question and there are concerns that the metal hip implants shed metal debris when the surfaces of the implant rub together during normal activities, such as walking.

“Metal hip devices have been associated with increased and premature failure rates and a range of alleged, adverse medical reactions,” said Mr. Parker. “Parker Waichman clients have also alleged that debris from the chromium and cobalt hip devices have caused tissue death and increased blood metal ion levels.” Regulators have advised metal ion testing in some patients to determine whether the implant has failed.

Many lawsuits point out that metal-on-metal hips were not clinically tested before they were approved. In August 2015, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) sought to change this by requiring device makers to go through a stricter approval process to ensure metal-on-metal hips were released to the market. Johnson & Johnson halted sales of the metal-on-metal version of the Pinnacle device following this decision. According to Parker Waichman, an array of adverse reactions allegedly associated with metal hip devices include, but are not limited to, increased blood metal ion levels and metal poisoning; dislocations; pain; fracture; difficulty ambulating, rising, standing, and balancing; noise emanating from the joint; and pseudotumors.

“As we have long noted, not every medical device is safety tested prior to market release. This is a long-discussed and well-known issue in the system that has given rise to increased controversy, especially regarding metal-on-metal hips,” Mr. Parker added.

In the United States, device makers may seek U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) clearance through a 510(k) application if that device is substantially similar to a device that has already been approved. Under this speedier clearance route, device makers are only required to file paperwork with the FDA and pay a fee, Parker Waichman explains.

For further information regarding premature failure of a metal hip device, or other health problems associated with metal hip implants, please contact the firm at its Defective Hip Implant page at yourlawyer.com. Free case evaluations are also available by calling 1-800-LAW-INFO (1-800-529-4636).