[fusion_builder_container hundred_percent="no" equal_height_columns="no" hide_on_mobile="small-visibility,medium-visibility,large-visibility" background_position="center center" background_repeat="no-repeat" fade="no" background_parallax="none" enable_mobile="no" parallax_speed="0.3" video_aspect_ratio="16:9" video_loop="yes" video_mute="yes" overlay_opacity="0.5" border_style="solid" padding_top="20px" padding_bottom="20px"][fusion_builder_row][fusion_builder_column type="1_1" layout="1_1" spacing="" center_content="no" hover_type="none" link="" min_height="" hide_on_mobile="small-visibility,medium-visibility,large-visibility" class="" id="" background_color="" background_image="" background_position="left top" background_repeat="no-repeat" border_size="0" border_color="" border_style="solid" border_position="all" padding="" dimension_margin="" animation_type="" animation_direction="left" animation_speed="0.3" animation_offset="" last="no"][fusion_text]
Here is the conclusion to our three-part blogOverview of Multidistrict Litigation for Hip Implant Lawsuits.
While the first two parts of this blog focused on defining what multidistrict litigation (MDL) is and where some of the main MDLs for hip implant lawsuits have been set up throughout the U.S., below, we will conclude this blog by discussing some of the primary allegations in these cases.
Plaintiffs’ Allegations in MDLs for Hip Implant Lawsuits
A number of allegations have been pointed at hip implant manufacturers in the various multidistrict litigations for hip implant lawsuits that are currently underway in federal courts throughout the U.S.
Among these are the contentions that hip implant manufacturers (like Stryker, Bioment, DePuy, Wright Medical Technology, etc.):
- Failed to adequately test the safety of metal-on-metal (MoM) hip implants before marketing them as safe and effective
- Often intentionally sidestepped safety testing by applying for FDA approval through the 501(k) process (which has been largely criticized in that it allows medical device manufacturers to apply for approval of devices by citing similarities between their products and devices that are already approved by the FDA)
- Knew about the high rates of failure in their MoM hip implants and failed to warn the public about them
- Advanced their own interests for increasing their profits at the cost of public safety.
While some of the hip implant manufacturers named as defendants in the ongoing MDLs for these devices have already made an effort to settle some of the cases against them, others are still pending in federal courts.
Additionally, many individual lawsuits (filed by plaintiffs who chose not to join a hip implant MDL) are still pending against various hip implant manufacturers.
Product Liability & Hip Replacement Lawyer George McLaughlin: Experience You CAN Trust
Have you or a loved one sustained serious injuries due to use of a defective hip implant? If so, it’s time to contact the Warshauer-McLaughlin Law Group, P.C.
George McLaughlin, a partner of the Warshauer-McLaughlin Law Group, P.C., has more than thirty years of experience handling product liability claims at the national level. His focus on modular neck fracture cases makes him the go-to attorney in the United States for these claims. The unique circumstances surrounding this product make it difficult and extremely expensive to the client, for an attorney who has not done many of these cases before to successfully handle a modular neck fracture cases.
As an experienced modular neck fracture attorney, Mr. McLaughlin possesses the knowledge, skills, and resources necessary to assert your rights and ensure that you receive the full measure of compensation to which you are entitled.
Contact Us Today
Let’s discuss your case. Contact our firm by calling (720) 606-6887 or by emailing us using the contact form on the top of this screen. You will pay nothing to learn more about your rights during a free initial consult, so you have nothing to lose – and everything to gain – by contacting us today.