We recently blogged about the final chapter (at the district court level, anyway) of the big defense win in the Mirena MDL. The long-overdue result was entry of summary judgment for the defendant against all claims. As the blog also chronicled, the key Mirena decision had been earlier – and was already appealed and
Search results for: bowersock
Another One Bites the Dust: Plaintiff’s Causation Expert Excluded in Hernia Mesh Litigation
We spent Sunday evening in the familiar confines of a top-notch local professional theatre. The production was a short (80-minute), two-character play. It was entirely dialogue-driven, so everything the audience learned came out of a character’s mouth – there was no action to speak of. It was also perfectly cast, well-acted, and absorbing. By the…
Southern District of Indiana Excludes Plaintiffs’ Experts in Hernia Mesh Case
We loved La La Land. We were enchanted by the colors and the music and the dancing. We were transported by the dreams-come-true and saddened by the could-have-beens. We disappeared into the characters’ world for two hours and were not ready when the lights came up. For us, it was the epitome of a movie experience, and we were thrilled – momentarily – when it was announced as Best Picture. But, as all who witnessed Oscargate (and anyone who didn’t spend the last week in a submarine) can attest, simply saying it didn’t make it so.
Last week, in Bowersock, et al. v. Davol, Inc. and C.R. Bard, Inc., 2017 WL 711849 (S.D. Ind. Feb. 23, 2017) the United States District Court for the Southern District of Indiana reached the same conclusion, excluding the plaintiffs’ experts in a hernia mesh case. The plaintiffs claimed that a component of the defendants’ hernia mesh patch – a polyethylene terephthalate ring – perforated the intestines of the plaintiffs’ decedent, ultimately resulting in sepsis and death.
An autopsy was performed and concluded that the decedent’s small bowel and colon were intact, without perforation. But the hernia mesh patch was not retrieved from the decedent’s body before she was buried, so, seven years later (!!!), the plaintiffs had the body exhumed so the patch could be retrieved and analyzed, after which they submitted the reports of two causation experts – a surgeon and a biomedical engineer – to opine that components of the mesh patch caused the decedent’s injuries.
The plaintiffs’ first expert, a general and gastrointestinal surgeon who used the defendants’ patch in his own practice, reviewed the patch explanted from the decedent’s exhumed body. He opined that the ring, though not broken, had buckled, creating a sharp edge that rubbed against the decedent’s bowel and perforated it.…
Continue Reading Southern District of Indiana Excludes Plaintiffs’ Experts in Hernia Mesh Case