Articles Tagged with Surgery

Injured in Surgery: Is It Product Liability or Medical Malpractice?

Published on: June 2, 2018 | By Clay Hodges

I get calls from people who have been badly injured after surgery. If it’s straightforward surgery to repair a torn ACL, the question is whether the surgeon was negligent; if that turns out to be the case, the caller will have a claim for medical malpractice. But what if the surgeon is implanting a device: an artificial hip or knee or hernia mesh or pacemaker? And then after surgery the patient is worse off than before? If this is the result, the next question is this: was the person the victim of a defective product or medical malpractice? Or both?

So What’s the Difference?

Medical malpractice is the legal term for a doctor who has been negligent. This means that the doctor failed to perform the surgery with an expected degree of care and competence. In a phrase, the doctor simply screwed up the surgery. For a plaintiff to win a medical malpractice claim, he or she must show that the doctor failed to perform his duties with a normal “standard of care” typical of similarly situated doctors. This means that surgeons in small towns will be judged against similar doctors in similar towns, while doctors from major research hospitals in big cities will be judged against their similarly situated peers, and of course will be held to a higher standard. The bottom line is this: medical malpractice is the failure to provide competent medical care, causing the patient unexpected injury.

Zimmer Biomet Reverse Shoulder Product Recall: What You Should Know

Published on: February 21, 2017 | By Clay Hodges

Shoulder replacement surgeries are common and provide relief to thousands. But some conventional shoulder replacement surgeries don’t work, requiring a different type of shoulder replacement surgery.

In a typical shoulder replacement, artificial components replace natural ones, such that an artificial cup is placed into the shoulder while an artificial ball is placed at the top of the humerus, or arm bone. For individuals with rotator cuff tears and arthropathy, which is a complex type of shoulder arthritis, this type of shoulder replacement surgery doesn’t work.

Instead, patients must obtain a reverse shoulder replacement, which places the ball in the shoulder and the cup at the top of the humerus. One such reverse shoulder replacement medical device is Zimmer Biomet’s Comprehensive Reverse Shoulder System. However, this product has recently been recalled by Zimmer Biomet.

The Reverse Shoulder Recall

On December 15, 2016, Zimmer Biomet recalled its Comprehensive Reverse Shoulder System, noting that it was fracturing far more often than expected and could lead to serious problems, such as infection, inability to use the shoulder and even death. Fracturing is an unusual problem, since most shoulder replacement complications do not involve fracturing, but instead deal with excessive wear, dislocating and loosening of joint components.

Due to the severity of the problem with the Comprehensive Reverse Shoulder System, the U.S. Food Drug and Administration (FDA) classified this recall as a Class I recall, which is the most serious type of recall available.

Zimmer NexGen Knee Lawsuits: Now the Good News

Published on: November 11, 2016 | By Clay Hodges

Without question, the Zimmer NexGen Knee MDL is not going all that well for plaintiffs lately. The first bellwether trial ended in a defense verdict in favor of Zimmer. Then Judge Rebecca Pallmeyer issued a Lone Pine Order which imposed a heavier burden on plaintiffs to avoid dismissal of their cases. That Order requires each plaintiff to file an Expert Declarations form establishing that the case meets all the latest requirements to warrant its continued place in the litigation. These requirements include a showing of (1) evidence of loosening of the artificial knee, (2) evidence of knee flexion of 120 degrees, (3) other detailed designations of injury and product failure. You can read more about the Lone Pine Order here.

Then, on October 21, 2016, Judge Pallmeyer ruled that the second bellwether case did not warrant a jury trial. In her Order, she granted summary judgment for Zimmer. You can read about that court decision here, but in a nutshell, Judge Pallmeyer simply rejected the validity of the plaintiff’s key expert witness. She concluded that Dr. Joseph Fetto failed to refer to scientific literature or to “give any explanation for why the implant design, and asymmetric loading generally, causes . . . loosening.” (Order, p. 12) She wrote at length about the reasons why Dr. Fetto’s testimony is unreliable, ultimately concluding that Dr. Fetto has not “given the court sufficient basis to conclude that his opinion is reliable.” (Order, p. 17) Without a reliable expert witness, a plaintiff cannot win a product liability case.

The Judge’s Order was a sledgehammer, but . . .

It’s Not All Bad News

It’s quite awful to select a bellwether case, prepare it for trial, and then, days before jury selection, the judge grants summary judgment on all claims in favor of defendants. After years of litigation, the plaintiff, who was clearly injured, was out of court without compensation. Still, there is reason to believe that future cases may have different results. Judge Pallmeyer admitted as much in the last section of her 43-page order, titled “Potential Differences Between Joas’s Case and Others in the MDL.” Let’s examine a few keys statements in the part of her Order (the italicized statements below were written by Judge Pallmeyer):

Seven Actions You Should Take If You Have An IVC Filter Implant

Published on: June 23, 2016 | By Clay Hodges

Approximately 250,000 people have an IVC filter implanted each year. Each time it captures a blood clot and prevents it from moving into the heart or lungs, it is a great thing. Unfortunately, IVC filters often cause other health problems, sometimes as serious as the conditions they were designed to prevent. I wrote about the problems the IVC filter is causing many patients here.

Two corporations manufacture most of the IVC filters on the market: C.R. Bard, Inc. and Cook Medical, Inc. Lawsuits have been filed over Bard’s Recovery, G2, and G2 Express IVC filters. Lawsuits have also been filed over Cook’s Gunther Tulip and Celect IVC filters. Hundreds of people have been injured by these IVC filters. Try not to be one of them.

If you have an IVC filter implanted in your body, you must stay on high alert. I suggest taking the following actions if you have an IVC filter implant:

★★★★★

I was involved in a case for the faulty hip replacements. Clay Hodges represented me. I can't say enough about how much he has helped me. Clay was able to win multiple settlements on my behalf with most of them being the maximum amount able to be awarded. Matt J.

Clay, thank you sir for making a disheartening experience at least palatable, you and your staff were honest, caring and understanding through the entire process of my wife’s hip replacements, while monetary settlements never make the pain and suffering end, it sometimes is the only way people can fight back to right a wrong. J. V.

We are absolutely pleased with how Clay Hodges handled my husband’s hip replacement claim. He always kept us informed of the progress. And, his work resulted in a settlement which we are extremely pleased. Thank you, Clay! Carol L. & Norm L.