medical products liability

Foam Issues Prompt Recall of Philips Ventilators

January 21, 2022 | Benjamin S. Persons, IV

The same problem that plagued defective Philips CPAP sleep apnea treatment machines has affected another line of products.

This recall affects Philips Trilogy 100 and 200-series ventilators. The company previously recalled these ventilators in 2021, but the company assured the Food and Drug Administration that it had fixed the problem. Trilogy 100 and 200 ventilators, which are widely used in a number of settings, contain polyurethane foam linings to deaden the gadget’s sound. These vibrations break up the foam, so patients could inhale microscopic particles, which are highly toxic.

Unsafe continuous positive airway pressure machines, which pump air into sleeping people to keep their airways open, have already prompted tens of thousands of lawsuits throughout the country.

Federal Court Upholds $2.4 Million Award in ObTape Lawsuit

October 18, 2019 | Benjamin S. Persons, IV

In recent years there have been hundreds of personal injury lawsuits filed against Mentor, the manufacturer of ObTape, a mesh sling used to treat urinary incontinence. According to a 2009 report in the New York Times, Mentor stopped selling ObTape in 2006 after reports emerged that pieces of the mesh sling were breaking off inside of patients. This rendered the devices ineffective in stopping incontinence and led to a variety of additional side effects, such as chronic bladder inflammation.

Taylor v. Mentor Worldwide LLC

Eventually, more than 800 lawsuits against Mentor, which is now owned by Johnson & Johnson, were consolidated as part of a multi-district litigation (MDL) proceeding here in Georgia. One of the first cases from this MDL to go to trial involved a woman named Teresa Taylor. She specifically accused Mentor of design defects in ObTape.

Pharmacy Faces Lawsuit Over Fatal Prescription Drug Interaction

December 28, 2018 | Benjamin S. Persons, IV

As we get older, it seems we need to take more and more prescription medications just to get through the day. We trust our doctors and pharmacists to ensure that these drugs are safe–not just on their own, but also when taken in combination with one another. But when this trust fails, and the patient suffers, who can be held legally responsible?

Allen v. The Kroger Company

A case now pending before a federal judge in Macon raises this exact question. The plaintiff is the mother of a woman who died after taking a combination of amitriptyline, a medication used to treat various types of mental illness, and morphine. According to the plaintiff’s lawsuit, her daughter had prescriptions for both medications, which were filled at the defendant’s pharmacy six days apart.

Georgia Couple’s Lawsuit Blames Tainted Colonoscopy for Their HIV Infections

December 14, 2018 | Benjamin S. Persons, IV

When it comes to surgical procedures, any Georgia healthcare professional will tell you their top safety priority is ensuring the proper sterilization of any equipment that gets near the patient’s body. Indeed, there is always a risk of transmitting a potentially lethal infection to a patient, even during “routine” surgery.

Collett v. Olympus Optical Co.

Of course, doctors and nurses are only effective in preventing infections if they have the right tools. So, what happens when a medical device manufacturer produces a defective product? The patient may suffer an infection and be forced to seek damages in court.

Can a Jury Award Damages for Medical Expenses but Nothing for “Pain and Suffering”?

April 20, 2018 | Benjamin S. Persons, IV

The right to a jury trial is a basic tenet of our legal system. Jurors are entrusted to carefully consider all of the evidence and return a verdict in accordance with the law. Of course, there are times when a jury’s verdict is so inconsistent with the facts that a judge or appellate court must intervene in order to protect the interests of the plaintiff alleging a personal injury.

Evans v. Rockdale Hospital, LLC

For instance, the Georgia Court of Appeals recently ordered a new trial in a medical malpractice case because the jury contradicted itself. It found the defendant liable for a serious act of medical malpractice, yet awarded the plaintiff zero damages for her pain and suffering. The appeals court said such a verdict “shocks the conscience” and necessitated a full retrial of the case before a new jury.

Atlanta Judge Reduces Punitive Damage Award in Defective Hip Replacement Case

May 13, 2016 | Benjamin S. Persons, IV

Every year thousands of Americans are injured or even killed due to defective medical products. While most manufacturers are responsible and take care to properly test a medical device or drug before introducing it into the marketplace, there are still cases where a defective product makes it to the patient. When that defect causes harm, it can take many years of litigation before the patient receives compensation.

Christiansen v. Wright Medical Technology Incorporated

Recently a federal judge in Atlanta rejected a medical device manufacturer’s bid to throw out a jury verdict arising from a product liability claim. Although the judge refused to disturb most of the jury’s findings on liability and damages, he did cut its punitive damages award by nearly 90%.