In a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Alabama, a couple has sued the makers of the Contasure Needleless Sling pelvic repair device, claiming that that the product was not manufactured properly, and caused severe damage, including permanent physical injuries and substantial pain and suffering.
The complaint states that the manufacturers failed to disclose “the hazards and dangerous propensities” of the device, and names DIMA, a corporation based out of Spain; Neomedic Inc.; Neomedic International S.L.; and Specialties Remeex International S.L.
The plaintiff, Virginia Cathers, allegedly received a Contasure Needleless Sling device surgically in April of 2009 in an attempt at treating her stress urinary continence.
The Contasure Needleless Sling pelvic repair device is implanted to support the pelvic organs and tissues, to treat pelvic organ prolapse, or to treat stress urinary continence, as is the case with Cathers. The procedure involves no skin incisions, so it is a popular option. In fact, the procedure only requires local anesthetics.
In the lawsuit, Cathers alleges that the device “contained unreasonably dangerous design defects and was not reasonably safe as intended to be used.” She claims that, as a result, she sustained severe and permanent injuries, and that the device “exposed her to risks that exceeded the benefit of the product, including the risks of developing serious and dangerous side effects, serious infection, the need for additional procedures to remove and replace the product, and/or the need for additional surgery as well as other severe and permanent health consequences.”
In the complaint, they list claims of negligence, strict liability, breach of express and implied warranties, fraudulent misrepresentation, negligent misrepresentation, and loss of consortium. It also relied on the fact that “the officers and directors of defendants participated in, authorized and directed the production and promotion of the product when they knew, or with the exercise of reasonable care should have known, of the hazards and dangerous propensities of the product and thereby actively participated in the tortious conduct which resulted in the injuries suffered by plaintiffs.”
The complaint states that, “as a direct and proximate result of defendants’ negligence and wrongful conduct, and the unreasonably dangerous characteristics of the product, plaintiff suffered and will continue to suffer severe and permanent physical injuries. [Cathers] has lost past earnings and has suffered a loss of earning capacity.”
Carithers argued that if she knew of the potential risks associated with the device, that she never would have gone through with the surgery. The lawsuit also states that there were practical and feasible alternative designs that would have been less harmful (if not entirely harm-free) without diminishing the functionality of the device itself.
There have already been 43 women (or their husbands) who have filed a civil lawsuit as the result of their defective Neomedic Women’s Pelvic Repair Products. Currently, there are 21 lawsuits pending in eight different federal districts.
The attorneys for those 21 lawsuits are asking the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation to transfer these cases to the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia for pretrial proceedings.
Because all of these lawsuits involve similar claims as to the products and how they have eroded or malfunctioned, the lawyer’s are attempting to persuade the judge in an effort to avoid the attorneys to argue the same issues multiple times in many different courtrooms, which would essentially lead to different verdict amounts and different results as to the outcome of the case. Not to mention that consolidating these cases would save all of the people involved (attorneys, clients, manufacturers) money on discovery and court costs.
For more information, contact a Gacovino Lake attorney at 1-800-246-HURT (4878).