Parker Waichman LLP

$1B Award In Third DePuy Pinnacle Bellwether

Johnson & Johnson and its orthopedics unit, DePuy Orthopaedics, are named defendants in more than 9,000 DePuy Pinnacle metal-on-metal hip replacement lawsuits. The metal-on-metal Pinnacle utilizes the Ultamet liner. The devices are implantable and meant to replace damaged hip joints Plaintiffs allege that the metal Pinnacle and Ultamet liner are prone to wear. This may […]


DePuy Pinnacle Case

Johnson & Johnson and its orthopedics unit, DePuy Orthopaedics, are named defendants in more than 9,000 DePuy Pinnacle metal-on-metal hip replacement lawsuits. The metal-on-metal Pinnacle utilizes the Ultamet liner. The devices are implantable and meant to replace damaged hip joints

Plaintiffs allege that the metal Pinnacle and Ultamet liner are prone to wear. This may cause the device to shed dangerous amounts of toxic metal debris into the tissue surrounding the joint, as well as the bloodstream, leading to metallosis, pseudotumor formation, adverse local tissue reactions, and other debilitating complications due to premature device failure. Plaintiffs also similarly allege that the metal-on-metal Pinnacle has the same design flaws that led to the 2010 recall of DePuy’s metal-on-metal ASR hip implant device. Plaintiffs in the Pinnacle MDL question why the Pinnacle implants have not undergone a recall.

Parker Waichman LLP is accepting DePuy Pinnacle metal-on-metal hip implant device/Ultamet liner lawsuits. Lawyers at our firm who specialize in DePuy MDLs are offering free legal consultations to individuals who have been implanted with the metal DePuy-Ultamet system and are concerned about potential injuries associated with the device.

FOURTH PINNACLE BELLWETHER CASE UNDERWAY

As of September 2017, the fourth federal bellwether trial that was brought over allegations that the metal-on-metal version of the DePuy Orthopaedics’ Pinnacle Hip Replacement System is defective is now underway. The bellwether is being heard in the United States District Court, Northern District of Texas.

Six Pinnacle lawsuits were filed on behalf of New York plaintiffs who alleged to have suffered serious complications concerning premature failure of their Pinnacle device have been organized in a multidistrict litigation and represent the first bellwether cases to be heard. The multidistrict litigation (MDL) is In re: DePuy Orthopaedics Inc. Pinnacle Hip Implant Product Liability Litigation, MDL No. 2244.

Opening statements began on September 20, 2017. The plaintiffs’ lawyer pointed out the DePuy Orthopaedics and its parent company, Johnson & Johnson, released the metal-on-metal Pinnacle hip device to market despite being aware that the Pinnacle is defective. The lawyer argued that the device makers’ internal emails, marketing materials, and research commissioned by J&J would show that the device makers used deceptive means in which to encourage surgeons to use the allegedly defective metal-on-metal Pinnacle.

This bellwether had been postponed until September 18, 2017 based on a U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit ruling days prior to the date the trial was to start, in which a “grave error” was cited by the sitting U.S. District Court judge, in requesting a trial delay. The trial start date was September 5, 2017 and involved eight plaintiffs from New York who were part of the DePuy Pinnacle MDL 2255. They were facing jurisdictional issues based on the June 2017 SCOTUS “Plavix Ruling” that restricts jurisdiction over plaintiffs who are residents of another state. That ruling forced thousands of non-California residents to determine if and where they are able to refile their Plavix claims. DePuy Orthopaedics and Johnson & Johnson asserted the Plavix ruling by stating that the New York residents are not subject to jurisdiction of the U.S. District Court, Northern District of Texas and that the trial should be stopped.

The move seemed to contradict the justification of certain aspects of the Joint Panel on Multidistrict Litigation (JPML) rules of procedure, which assigned the DePuy Pinnacle Hip Implant cases to the Texas court to consolidate the many thousands of cases nationwide.

TEXAS JURY AWARDS OVER $1 BILLION IN THIRD PINNACLE BELLWETHER

A trial heard in the federal district court in Dallas, Texas brought against Johnson & Johnson and DePuy Orthopaedics just found for the six California plaintiffs for over $1 billion.

All six plaintiffs had been implanted with the DePuy Pinnacle metal-on-metal device. DePuy Orthopaedics is a unit of Johnson & Johnson.

Individuals who underwent hip implantation surgery with the metal-on-metal DePuy Orthopaedics Pinnacle hip device likely believed the device would enable them to return to a life with increased mobility and flexibility.

The device was also likely touted as being longer lasting. Sadly, this has not been the case for many patients as the device often fails prematurely, necessitating painful, complex, and expensive revision surgeries to remove and replace the implanted device.

This verdict is the second entered against the device makers in a total of three bellwether trials brought forward in the federal multidistrict litigation (MDL),

Harris Martin reported. The first bellwether involved just one plaintiff and ended with a defense win. The second bellwether trial involved the consolidation of five plaintiffs from Texas. Their award was ultimately $150 million. The original award of $502 million was capped in compliance with Texas laws on punitive damage award amounts, according to Law360.

The six plaintiffs in this bellwether are from California; therefore, the jury award is not subject to the cap. The next bellwether is scheduled to begin in September 2017 and is expected to include 10 plaintiffs from New York.

DePuy and J&J were both found liable for: Negligent and defective design, negligent failure to warn, strict liability failure to warn, failure to recall, negligent misrepresentation, intentional misrepresentation, and fraudulent concealment.

In addition, J&J was found liable for aiding and abetting DePuy in the seven causes of action and the jury found J&J liable for conspiracy on the other six claims. The jury also found DePuy and J&J liable for punitive damages given that DePuy and J&J acted with malice or fraud.

To date, this was the largest hip implant trial verdict where six Pinnacle implant recipients. The $1 billion judgment was later reduced to $543 million, by Judge Kinkeade.

Prior BELLWETHER TRIALs

The federal MDLunderway in Texas concluded its first DePuy Pinnacle bellwether trial in October 2014, with a verdict for the defense.

In March 2016, the litigation’s second bellwether trial concluded with a verdict in favor of five Pinnacle plaintiffs. The original total award was for $500 million; however, damages were reduced to $151 million to comply with Texas law governing punitive damages.

WHAT IS A BELLWETHER TRIAL?

Bellwether trials are the initial cases that are brought to trial in large litigations, such as the DePuy Pinnacle MDL.

Bellwethers enable the parties to better understand how juries may react to evidence and legal arguments that are presented and that would likely be presented if the remaining similar cases reached trial. Bellwethers are also helpful when considering trends and rapid settlement negotiations.

WHAT IS A MULTIDISTRICT LITIGATION?

An MDL is organized when numerous lawsuits with similar allegations are combined in one court before one judge. Consolidating similar lawsuits reduces duplicate discovery and other potential redundancies and makes complex litigation more efficient.

Pinnacle-Ultamet, metal-on-metal hip backbround

The claims in these bellwether cases are similar and are also similar to those in other cases in the DePuy Pinnacle MDL. Key allegations involve the friction that occurs between the Pinnacle’s metal socket and metal ball head and released metal particles that enter the bloodstream and area tissue.

This metal ion release may lead to serious, life-long injuries. Allegations also included that J&J knew the Pinnacle device posed increased risks when compared to other available devices. Despite this, DePuy allegedly strongly drove sales and paid illegal kickbacks to surgeons to an effort to promote Pinnacle hip replacement device sales.

DePuy and J&J were both found liable for: Negligent and defective design, negligent failure to warn, strict liability failure to warn, failure to recall, negligent misrepresentation, intentional misrepresentation, and fraudulent concealment.

In addition, J&J was found liable for aiding and abetting DePuy in the seven causes of action and the jury found J&J liable for conspiracy on the other six claims. The jury also found DePuy and J&J liable for punitive damages given that DePuy and J&J acted with malice or fraud.

If you or someone you know has had surgery involving the DePuy Pinnacle, our Metal-on-Metal attorneys would like to hear from you. Parker Waichman LLP offers free case evaluations for anyone who has questions about their legal rights.

Metal-on-Metal Hips Cleared Through Rapid Regulatory Route

depuy pinnacle caseMetal-on-metal hip implants are made of all-metal surfaces and, when these devices were released, they were marketed as being a more durable and longer-lasting option for younger, active individuals. Now, the metal devices have been at the center of a controversy over how the devices were approved.

Not every medical device is clinically tested for safety prior to release. The 510(k) approval route has been met with controversy and contention given the number of devices that are now the subject of personal injury lawsuits, including metal-on-metal hip devices.

Many believe that had the devices undergone traditional testing, many injuries would have been avoided. Many metal-on-metal hips were approved via the 510(k) route and many lawsuits allege that the metal-on-metal hips were never clinically tested prior to approval.

The 510(k) is a regulatory clearing method utilized in the United States in which a device is quickly released to market. The 510(k) enables device makers to receive FDA clearance without having to undergo clinical testing if the manufacturers prove their devices are “substantially equivalent” to a previously approved device. Under the 510(k), device makers only need to file paperwork with the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and pay a fee.

Federal regulators sought to modify the 510(k) in August 2015 by requiring device makers to utilize a more stringent process when seeking approval to release metal-on-metal hip devices. Following this move, Johnson & Johnson ceased sales of its metal-on-metal version of the Pinnacle device.

In January 2013, the FDA warned that metal-on-metal hip replacements were tied to higher rates of early failure compared to those constructed from other materials. In 2016, the FDA finalized a new regulation requiring the manufacturers of two types of metal-on-metal hips to submit a premarket approval (PMA) application if they wanted to continue marketing their current devices and/or market a new implant.

In May 2013, DePuy Orthopaedics announced that it would phase out metal-on-metal hip implants, including the device named in the Pinnacle hip replacement lawsuits. According to The New York Times, DePuy cited slowing sales and the FDA’s changing its regulatory stance on all-metal hip implants as factors in its decision.

Metal-on-Metal Hip Device Injuries

The FDA has indicated that metal ions may cause significant complications when the metal parts of the hip device rub against one another and release cobalt and chromium ions into the patient’s bloodstream and the tissue surrounding the implant.

The implant may also likely experience early failure, which leads to a variety of adverse reactions and the need for expensive, painful, and complex revision surgery to remove and replace the device. Alleged injuries include:

  • Difficulty ambulating, rising, standing, and balancing
  • Dislocation, fracture
  • Elevated blood cobalt and chromium ion levels
  • Fluid collection, pseudotumors
  • Hip replacement failure
  • Loosening of the implant
  • Loss of mobility
  • Metallosis (metal poisoning)
  • Necrosis (tissue death) or soft tissue damage
  • Osteolysis, damage to the bone cells
  • Pain that is often severe and spreads to the groin and/or back
  • Popping sounds and other noise emanating from the joint

Need Legal Help Regarding depuy pinnacle case?

The personal injury attorneys at Parker Waichman LLP offer free, no-obligation case evaluations. For more information, fill out our online contact form or call 1-800-YOURLAWYER (1-800-968-7529).

What Our Clients Say About Us
We have worked with thousands of clients and we appreciate them and their positive reviews. Here are just a few recent client reviews...
5 Star Reviews 150
i was lucky to have had Benita Rollis help me with my claim. She answered all my questions and helped me throughout this long process. She was always helpful and got back to me in a timely manner.
Tommy
3 years ago
5 Star Reviews 150
Jessie Salcedo was very helpful, and got to my needs quickly. She was knowledgeable of my case and very kind.
Eric Sershen
5 years ago
5 Star Reviews 150
Francisco A. Albites Esq. recently represented me in a legal matter. He communicated with me directly. He very skillfully negotiated my case to a successful outcome. Mr. Alibites knowledge of the law and his integrity are a testament to his success as an attorney. I would 100% refer him to friends and family members.
Gary Utech
3 years ago

Why Choose Us to Help You?

We Take Care of Everything
Your situation is stressful enough: Let us take on the deadlines, paperwork, investigation, and litigation. We'll handle every detail so you don't have to worry.
No Recovery = No Legal Fees
We work on a contingency-fee basis, meaning that we only get paid from a portion of your settlement or jury award. If you don't get compensation, you owe us nothing.
Decades of Experience
Your situation is stressful enough: Let us take on the deadlines, paperwork, investigation, and litigation. We'll handle every detail so you don't have to worry.
Respected by Our Peers
Judges, insurance adjusters, and fellow attorneys all speak highly of our skills, and we've earned numerous accolades, including a flawless rating from AVVO.
We Have Many Locations To Serve You
We have the experience and the skilled litigators to win your case. Contact us and speak with a real attorney who can help you.
Long Island – Nassau
Parker Waichman LLP
6 Harbor Park Drive
Port Washington, NY 11050
Long Island – Suffolk
Parker Waichman LLP
201 Old Country Road – Suite 145
Melville, NY 11747
New York
Parker Waichman LLP
59 Maiden Lane, 6th Floor
New York, NY 10038
Queens
Parker Waichman LLP
118-35 Queens Boulevard, Suite 400
Forest Hills, NY 11375
Brooklyn
Parker Waichman LLP
300 Cadman Plaza West
One Pierrepont Plaza, 12th Floor
Brooklyn, NY 11201
New Jersey
Parker Waichman LLP
80 Main Street, Suite 265
West Orange, NJ 07052
Florida
Parker Waichman LLP
27299 Riverview Center Boulevard
Suite 108
Bonita Springs, FL 34134
Nationwide Service
Parker Waichman LLP
59 Maiden Lane, 6th Floor
New York, NY 10038