Product Liability

Published on: July 15, 2016

Moll Law Group Preparing to File Lawsuits on Behalf of Women Nationwide Diagnosed with Ovarian Cancer Following Their Use of Johnson & Johnson Talcum Powder Products

Based in Chicago and representing clients across the United States, Moll Law Group is preparing to file lawsuits on behalf of women who have been diagnosed with ovarian cancer as the result of using Johnson & Johnson talcum powder products, including Baby Powder and Shower to Shower. The international pharmaceutical giant has already faced a number of lawsuits involving similar claims about the negative and devastating consequences of the long-term use of its talcum powder products.

Talcum powder is a mineral that has many similarities to asbestos, which is a carcinogenic agent. Prior to the 1970s, products that contained talcum powder frequently also contained asbestos. According to medical researchers, when talcum powder enters the vagina, it can travel to the ovaries, where it can lead to inflammation and an increased risk of developing ovarian cancer. Harvard researchers even concluded in a study comparing the rates of ovarian cancer in women who used talcum powder products to women who did not that there is a 36 percent increased risk of developing the deadly condition in women who do use the products.

In 2014, two class action lawsuits were filed just one year after a plaintiff in South Dakota prevailed against Johnson & Johnson. The woman in that lawsuit alleged that the company was negligent for failing to warn her about the risk of developing ovarian cancer as the result of using talcum powder products. The plaintiff was diagnosed with ovarian cancer in 2006. In May 2016, a jury in St. Louis, Missouri, returned a verdict awarding a plaintiff in a similar lawsuit $55 million in damages. The plaintiff in that case had used Johnson & Johnson’s Baby Powder product for four decades. Three months prior to that, another St. Louis jury awarded $72 million in compensatory damages to the family of a woman who lost her life as the result of ovarian cancer, which physicians linked to her use of the company’s talcum powder-based products.

Continue reading →

Published on: July 6, 2016

DePuy Seeks Stay of Litigation To Appeal $490 Million Verdict in Metal-on-Metal Hip Implant Litigation

By Moll Law Group

One of Johnson & Johnson’s subsidiary companies has asked a federal appellate court to enter a stay of litigation in a lawsuit involving its Pinnacle metal-on-metal hip implant device. The company is seeking this time-out, claiming that it needs to appeal a $490 million jury verdict against the medical device manufacturer. During March 2016, a federal jury in Texas returned a verdict against DePuy Orthopedics, the subsidiary in question, totaling $490 million in favor of five plaintiffs who alleged the subsidiary’s hip implant caused them serious injuries.

Following a two-month trial on the product liability claim, the jurors concluded that DePuy’s metal-on-metal hip implants, which were a spinoff model based on the Pinnacle hip implants, were designed in an unreasonably dangerous manner and that DePuy had failed to include appropriate warnings with the products about the dangers that users may face. To recover compensation in a medical device case, the plaintiff must show that the medical device was designed in an unreasonably dangerous fashion. This can also include facts showing that the company failed to include proper warnings or instructions with the device. Here, for example, the plaintiffs alleged that DePuy failed to warn patients about the likelihood of metal fragments entering patients’ bloodstreams and causing metallosis. The jury returned a verdict form awarding $130 million in compensatory damages and $360 million in punitive damages.

Prior to this, in October 2014, the first case litigating whether the Pinnacle hip implant was defective was concluded when a federal jury returned a verdict stating that DePuy was not liable for the plaintiffs’ injuries and awarding the plaintiffs zero damages.

Continue reading →

Published on: July 2, 2016

Former Zimmer Biomet Sales Rep Alleges Wrongful Termination for Reporting Physician Misconduct

By Moll Law Group

A former sales representative for the medical device manufacturing company Zimmer Biomet (“Zimmer”) has filed a lawsuit against the company, claiming that the orthopedics provider fired him as a result of the testimony he provided during a grand jury hearing against a physician who was accused of performing unnecessary knee replacement procedures. Further catapulting this story into the public eye is the fact that the sales representative, named Dominick Pistone, is the brother of Joseph Pistone, an FBI agent who served as the basis for the movie Donnie Brasco.

As a sales representative, Pistone sold Zimmer products for 25 years until the company terminated his employment in June 2015. The lawsuit also alleges that some time in 2007, Pistone learned that a physician who has not been identified by name was “performing numerous double knee replacements, well above the average . . . primarily for financial gain and not in the best interest of the patients.”

Additionally, the complaint states that the device the unnamed doctor used in these procedures was not subject to FDA approval. The CEO of the company that formally manufactured the device, OtisMed, was sent to prison for two years, and the company was required to pay an $80 million settlement to Stryker, which had acquired OtisMed during 2009.

Continue reading →

Published on: June 24, 2016

Segways Pose Serious Safety Risk to Consumers

By Moll Law Group

These days, a number of futuristic toys and machines are hitting the market, including hoverboards, drones, and the infamous Segway. This last device is a two-wheeled scooter that allows the rider to stand up while riding and steer the machine, which includes a self-balancing mechanism. Although many people have enjoyed riding Segways, and the devices have become popular at many tourist attractions, they are incredibly dangerous and can lead to serious injuries or even death.

In 2010, for example, a British entrepreneur died after the Segway he was riding drove off a cliff on his estate in Britain. The entrepreneur had purchased the company less than a year before the tragic accident. At the time of the accident, he had been driving one of the off-road models of the Segway, designed to handle more rugged terrain than common urban environments. This is not the only incident of injuries associated with Segways, with hundreds of people reporting to emergency rooms with serious traumas. According to a case review of injuries associated with Segway devices released in 2010, some of the most common injuries associated with the device are facial traumas, head injuries, and broken bones.

With tens of thousands of Segways in operation in the United States, many physicians and public health experts have asked the U.S. Consumer Protection Agency to promulgate stricter safety regulations for the devices to keep riders from harm. The study also urged riders to wear helmets and other protective equipment when riding Segways, which can be particularly important if the rider is inexperienced.

Continue reading →

Published on: June 18, 2016

Ethicon Transvaginal Mesh MDL Lawsuit Update

By Moll Law Group

Thousands of women have come forward to bring lawsuits against the makers of transvaginal mesh products, alleging that they suffered serious, painful, and in some cases permanent injuries as a result of the products’ dangerous nature. Ethicon is one of the main manufacturers implicated in these lawsuits, which is a subsidiary of major health product manufacturer Johnson & Johnson.

In general, these lawsuits claim that after receiving an Ethicon transvaginal mesh implant, the women experienced a variety of adverse effects, including abdominal pain, painful intercourse, and other complications as the result of the device migrating after implantation or otherwise not functioning as promised in the marketing materials associated with the device. Several of these women required subsequent revision surgeries and will need constant ongoing care to monitor the resulting complications.

There have been so many lawsuits filed against Johnson & Johnson regarding the Ethicon product that the lawsuits have been organized into an MDL or multi-district litigation. Similar to a class action, an MDL proceeding seeks to associate cases that have common facts, legal claims, and injuries. This helps expedite the processing of these cases and promotes consistency in how each case is adjudicated.

Continue reading →

Published on: June 2, 2016

California Proposes Update to Prop 65 Toxic Chemical Product Warning Label

By Moll Law Group

California’s Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment has released a new set of revisions to its proposed overhaul of the state’s Prop 65 product labeling law. This effort is the first significant modification to the label, which must be appended to certain products and product shelf spaces, in several decades. The new warning label has been under development since 2013.

According to Prop 65, manufacturers must label products that contain a significant level of toxic chemicals deemed to pose health hazards to consumers, particularly cancer. Similarly, retailers must include a notice on shelving next to these products, further alerting consumers about the potential risks. As a result, manufacturers and product sellers doing business in California must conduct thorough tests and investigations into the chemicals that are present in their products.

OEHHA administers Prop 65 in California and maintains a list of the toxic chemicals that will require a manufacturer to include a warning. The list also provides the minimum levels at which a label will be required. In some cases, a trace amount of a toxic chemical present in a product will not require a label. There are a wide variety of chemicals on the list, including both naturally occurring and synthetic ingredients.

Continue reading →

Published on: May 26, 2016

FDA Imposes Stricter Regulations for E-Cigarettes and Other Tobacco Products

By Moll Law Group

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration is taking new steps to tighten the regulations on e-cigarette products, which have recently become popular based on claims that they pose less of a health risk to users than traditional tobacco products. According to the federal agency, e-cigarettes, as well as pipe tobacco, cigars, and hookah tobacco, will now be regulated according to the existing rules for smokeless tobacco, cigarettes, and roll-your-own smoking products. The new regulations will take effect 90 days from the date the new rule was enacted, which is August 3, 2016.

Under the new rules, tobacco companies will be required to submit information about their e-cigarette and tobacco products to the agency for pre-approval, including a list of the ingredients included in the product. They will also need to apply certain warnings on the products’ packaging and advertisements before they can begin marketing the products.

E-cigarettes consist of a handheld electronic device that vaporizes nicotine fluid held within a compartment in the device. It is also commonly referred to as vaping. E-cigarettes have been especially popular among the younger crowd.

Continue reading →

Published on: May 21, 2016

Johnson & Johnson to Appeal $55 Million Verdict in Talcum Powder Product Liability Lawsuit

By Moll Law Group

Johnson & Johnson, a manufacturer of controversial talc products, has stated that it intends to appeal a $55 million verdict against it awarded by a Missouri jury. The jury concluded that the product maker was liable for injuries the plaintiff sustained after using its talcum powder products, including ovarian cancer. According to the plaintiff, she used Johnson & Johnson’s talc products for several decades on her genital region. She was eventually diagnosed with ovarian cancer, requiring a hysterectomy and other related surgical procedures.

According to a statement released by Johnson & Johnson following the recent jury verdict, the manufacturer believes that the jury’s conclusion contravenes roughly 30 years of scientific studies from researchers around the world, concluding that cosmetic talc does not pose health and safety risks.

This litigation marks the second verdict against the health care company. Earlier, another jury in Missouri returned a $72 million verdict against the company in a case involving a woman who developed ovarian cancer and died after using Johnson & Johnson’s Baby Powder and Shower to Shower products for multiple decades. In 2013, a South Dakota jury returned a mixed verdict in another case involving allegations of cancer-related injuries after using the company’s talcum-based products. Although the jury concluded that Johnson & Johnson was negligent, it did not award any damages to the plaintiff because her cancer had gone into remission when the trial commenced.

Continue reading →

Published on: April 29, 2016

Cannabis Products Raise Health and Safety Concerns for Consumers

By Moll Law Group

Cannabis is still a controversial topic in the United States. Although some states have deregulated marijuana and even allowed for recreational use, others have maintained criminal liability and punishments for the possession and distribution of marijuana. As the legal and regulatory landscape for cannabis continues to change, certain companies specializing in cannabis-based products are cropping up in states that allow medical or recreational consumption. Since this is such a new frontier, however, there are few safety measures in place to ensure that patients and patrons who purchase these products aren’t receiving a potentially dangerous product.

The federal government recently reaffirmed its long-standing position that federal prosecutors should not focus their resources on prosecuting cannabis-related crimes. In 2009, the Department of Justice issued a memo instructing federal prosecutors to forgo investigating criminal activity involving cannabis if the suspect’s conduct clearly conformed with the state’s medical marijuana laws. Five years later, Congress enacted an amendment that barred the Department of Justice from allocating federal funds to programs that would prevent states from passing legislation allowing medical marijuana.

Continue reading →

Published on: April 9, 2016

Nestle Initiates Recall Over Fears that Frozen Food Products Contain Glass

By Moll Law Group

Nestle Corporation is one of the biggest food manufacturers in the world, with many people associating the brand with the chocolates and other sweets it makes. It also produces a wide variety of frozen foods under a variety of labels, including Stouffer’s, Lean Cuisine, and DiGiorno pizza. The manufacturing process for frozen foods can be quite complex and typically involves many different steps, including everything from preparing the food and packaging it to freezing it.

Recent reports indicate that Nestle has recalled roughly three million units of its frozen food products that contain spinach over fears that the spinach contains glass. A wide variety of products are affected, including pizzas, pasta dishes, lasagnas, and other popular Nestle dishes. The company has released a list of production codes that customers can use to identify whether a particular unit is part of the recall. The production code is printed on the side of the DiGiorno, Lean Cuisine, and Stouffer’s packages.

To recover compensation after suffering injuries from a dangerous product, the plaintiff must show that the product was designed in an unreasonably dangerous manner or that the particular unit the plaintiff received suffered from a defect during the manufacturing process that rendered the unit unreasonably dangerous. A food item that contains a dangerous foreign object not originally designed to be part of the food item satisfies the latter prong of this test.

Continue reading →