Hip & Knee Implant Litigation
With HarrisMartin's Hip & Knee Implant Litigation Report, you will be the first to know about critical developments in these emerging areas of medical device litigation. The report includes coast-to-coast coverage of Zimmer NexGen Knee, Durom Cup Hip, DePuy ASR and Pinnacle Hip, Wright Medical Technology Hip, Smith & Nephew R3 Hip and Journey Knee, Biomet M2a Magnum Hip, Stryker Rejuvenate, ABG II and Trident Hip and Triathlon Knee, and other developing orthopedic device cases. Click Here to Subscribe Now).
SEARCH THE ARCHIVES
Issue #105, February 2020
According to a recent court filing by Smith & Nephew Inc., there are 737 total active cases pending on the Birmingham Hip Resurfacing multidistrict litigation docket in Maryland federal court.
An Iowa federal judge has dismissed a negligent misrepresentation claim in a hip replacement action, ruling that the claim is not viable because the plaintiff failed to allege that Wright Medical Technology Inc. makes money by providing information, advice or counsel.
An Oregon federal judge has denied a motion to intervene filed on behalf of the plaintiff’s four minor children in a hip replacement action, explaining that it is unclear who has the legal authority to represent the children.
Following Howmedica Osteonics Corp.’s recent motion to dismiss 18 LFIT V40 Femoral Head cases for failure to serve a plaintiff fact sheet, the judge overseeing the MDL docket has ordered the plaintiffs to show cause as to why their actions should not be dismissed.
Issue #104, January 2020
A Maryland federal judge has dismissed as time barred certain claims and, in some instances, entire cases, pending on the BHR Hip Resurfacing multidistrict litigation docket, ruling that the claims accrued on the date of the plaintiffs’ revision surgeries.
A Missouri federal judge has consolidated three Biomet M2a-Magnum metal-on-metal hip cases for trial, holding that Biomet’s knowledge of the device’s risks is a central issue in the cases, increasing the risk of inconsistent adjudications.
A Minnesota federal judge has dismissed strict liability claims in a Smith & Nephew knee replacement action, holding that the plaintiff failed to specify how the device was unreasonably dangerous or how a different warning would have changed his surgeon’s decision to implant the product.
A Missouri federal judge has allowed the plaintiff in a hip replacement case to amend his petition to allege the correct mechanism of failure in the device, concluding that good cause for amendment was shown.
Following Howmedica Osteonics Corp.’s motion to dismiss 24 LFIT V40 Femoral Head cases for failure to serve either a case questionnaire or plaintiff fact sheet, the MDL judge has ordered the plaintiffs to show cause as to why their actions should not be dismissed.
A lawsuit targeting a Smith & Nephew knee replacement system is time-barred because the plaintiff was aware that the device may have caused his injuries by his revision surgery yet failed to file his complaint within two years of that date, an Ohio federal judge has ruled.