This short-form complaint does not make a full statement of allegations and counts. Instead, it makes reference to another complaint in a multi-district litigation, MDL No. 2846, which is combining similar cases from across the country. The combined case is called In Re: Davol, Inc./CR Bard, Inc. Polypropylene Hernia Mesh Products Liability Litigation.
The short-form complaint names both Davol, Inc. and CR Bard, Inc. as its defendants. The product it checks off, from a long list of similar or related products, is the PerFix Plug, implanted in October 2017 in the state of Georgia.
A better picture of the issues is presented by an earlier amended complaint now in the MDL combined case. This earlier case concerns a mesh patch product called the Bard Ventralix Hernia Patch. The patch was implanted in plaintiff Corine Barnes in October 2014 to fix an incarcerated ventral hernia.
According to this earlier complaint, the patch was made of “materials which are biologically incompatible with human tissue and react negatively and sometimes dangerously with a large number of those on whom it is used.” Because the mesh is “incompatible with human tissue [it] often causes a negative immune response in patients implanted with the Product.”
The complaint alleges that CR Bard “failed to perform proper and adequate testing and research in order to determine and evaluate the risks and benefits of the Product.” Despite this, the complaint claims, the product was “marketed to the medical and healthcare community and to patients as a safe, effective and reliable medical device, implanted by safe and effective, minimally invasive surgical techniques, and is safer and more effective as compared to other products.”
What happens after the patch is implanted? The earlier complaint alleges that “those persons who have been surgically implanted with the Product have suffered and/or are at a greatly increased risk of life-threatening complications as it can erode into the bowel, affect the small and large intestines, require multiple addition surgeries for extraction and partial bowel removal, weeks of hospitalization, colostomies, systemic infections, and more.”
The MDL case incorporates a long list of mesh devices which are similarly alleged to be defective.
This short-form complaint checks off the counts in the Master Complaint for the MDL that are also claimed in by this plaintiff:
- Strict Product Liability—Defective Design, Failure to Warn, and Manufacturing Defect
- Negligence, Negligence Per Se, and Gross Negligence
- Violation of state consumer protection laws
- Breach of Implied and Express Warranties
- Negligent and Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress
- Negligent Misrepresentation
- Fraud and Fraudulent Misrepresentation
- Fraudulent Concealment
It asks for punitive damages and demands a jury trial.
Article Type: LawsuitTopic: Medical Devices
Most Recent Case Event
Davol, CR Bard Hernia Mesh Incompatible with Human Body Short Form Complaint
April 13, 2020
This short-form complaint does not make a full statement of allegations and counts. Instead, it makes reference to another complaint in a multi-district litigation, MDL No. 2846, which is combining similar cases from across the country. The combined case is called In Re: Davol, Inc./CR Bard, Inc. Polypropylene Hernia Mesh Products Liability Litigation.
Davol, CR Bard Hernia Mesh Incompatible with Human Body Short Form ComplaintCase Event History
Davol, CR Bard Hernia Mesh Incompatible with Human Body Short Form Complaint
April 13, 2020
This short-form complaint does not make a full statement of allegations and counts. Instead, it makes reference to another complaint in a multi-district litigation, MDL No. 2846, which is combining similar cases from across the country. The combined case is called In Re: Davol, Inc./CR Bard, Inc. Polypropylene Hernia Mesh Products Liability Litigation.
Davol, CR Bard Hernia Mesh Incompatible with Human Body Short Form Complaint