The jury found J&J liable, based on the negligence of its scientists in relation to its Prolift pelvic mesh implant, citing it as the root cause of plaintiff Patricia Hammons’ inability to have sex after it was implanted.
After 2 days of deliberation, the jury ruled in Hammons’ favor and granted their bid for punitive damages, which allows for additional arguments and evidence.
The pelvic mesh makers will have to challenge more than 860 product liability lawsuits on a case-by-case basis, a Pennsylvania state judge ruled in 2014 in a growing mass tort action in Philadelphia.
Judge Arnold New, director of the Complex Litigation Center at the Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas, on Sept. 2 dismissed joint motions by J&J subsidiary Ethicon, Boston Scientific, C.R. Bard(NYSE:BCR) and Endo Health Solutions (NSDQ:ENDP) unit American Medical Systems Holdings to toss all of the lawsuits en masse, according to court documents.
The defendants had argued that Pennsylvania law bars the bulk of the claims lodge in a master complaint covering some 863 product liability lawsuits filed with the Philly court.
“The preliminary objections are overruled without prejudice to raise as a choice-of-law issue via summary judgment on a case-by-case basis,” New wrote, according to court documents.
Earlier in 2014 New dismissed a 5th defendant, Secant Medical, from the mass tort. Keystone State law shields Secant from the lawsuits because the company only made a component of the larger companies’ transvaginal mesh products, New wrote.