Studies have linked IVC filters with a higher breakage risk, which could cause serious injury or death. Thanks to this information, victims filed IVC filter lawsuits, citing breakage or migration of these devices meant to catch blood clots.
Victims claim that the devices damaged their organs and blood vessels and sometimes caused fatalities. Many also say that removing faulty devices has been almost impossible.
For this reason, Judges in IVC filter lawsuits have awarded approximately $41 million in damages since March 2018.
About 15,000 cases remain unresolved in one state and two federal mass litigations. These lawsuits name several IVC filter manufacturers, including Cook Medical, Bard, Rex Medical, and Cordis.
Read this post to learn about the current verdicts and settlements for IVC filter lawsuits and determine whether you qualify to file a lawsuit against any of these manufacturers.
Cook Medical Lawsuits
By October 2019, Cook Medical faced 6,320 lawsuits as part of multidistrict litigation (MDL) tried in a federal court in Indiana.
Bellwether trials have been running since 2017 to determine the merits of each side’s claims and help with settlements.
Timeline for the Cook Medical IVC filter lawsuits
November 2017
Cook Medical won the lawsuit’s initial bellwether trial.
March 2018
A month before the second case went to trial, the judge decided that the plaintiff waited too long before filing the case hence dismissing it.
February 2019
Tonya Brand got a $3 million verdict from the court in the third Cook case for the injuries caused by her IVC filter.
IVC Filter Complications
IVC filters are intended to lower the risk of blood clots in individuals who cannot use blood thinners. Yet, others allege that IVC filters broke, migrated, or penetrated their veins, causing major complications.
Individuals can file IVC filter lawsuits for various, including:
- Blood clots
- Filter fracture
- Device migration
- Organ perforation
- Organ damage
- Impossible filter removal
The filters assume the shape of a cage, inserted through an individual’s groin or neck. Brittle legs deploy within the inferior vena cava- the main vein that supplies blood to the heart- and grab clots before they enter the lungs.
Unfortunately, IVC filters made by Bard and Cook Medical are susceptible to breaking, migrating, tilting, or perforating the inferior vena cava, a design flaw that led to numerous lawsuits in federal court.
When the gadgets break, pieces can move across the body, affecting the heart, lungs, and other organs. Victims claim that the manufacturers knew or should have known about the risks, yet they failed to warn physicians and patients about these risks.
Manufacturers and Brands Named in Lawsuits
Cook Medical and Bard manufactured several IVC filter brands mentioned in MDLs. A few of the IVC filters in these lawsuits include:
- Cook Gunther Tulip
- Cook Celect
- Bard G2
- Bard G2 Express
- Bard Recovery
Other manufacturers of IVC filters have also been named in individual lawsuits. Algon, ALN, Boston Scientific, and CORDIS are among the firms being accused. But neither of these lawsuits was included in MDLs as of August 2018.
Manufacturer Knew of IVC Filter Deaths
In 2015, NBC News found that Bard IVC filters were the cause of 39 deaths. The channel’s research claimed that Bard officials had known the risks for years, yet the corporation took no action.
A 2004 study commissioned by Bard that revealed the Bard Recovery IVC filter had a greater failure rate than competitor devices was taken by NBC as part of their investigation.
According to NBC, the company’s management distributed copies only to people who had a “need-to-know” and instructed all who read the study to keep it a secret.
Bard’s IVC Filter Verdicts and Settlements
The Ninth Circuit decided in the plaintiff’s favor during the initial Bard IVC Filter bellwether litigation, awarding a Georgia lady $3.6 million in damages.
Sherr-Una Booker received $2 million in punitive damages and $1.6 million in compensatory damages from the court.
When a defendant’s acts seriously affect others, such as Bard, juries punish them by awarding punitive damages.
Booker’s attorney contended that Bard’s administration knew their product was unsafe but promoted it without informing physicians of its risks.
Bard won in the subsequent bellwether trial held in June 2018 involving plaintiff Doris Jones.
Jones had a Bard Eclipse IVC Filter inserted in 2010. Doctors discovered the filter had broken years later, and a part of it had clogged her right pulmonary artery. Doctors were unable to remove the chunk.
A jury found that Bard’s warning to medics was sufficient. Bard has paid unspecified amounts to settle certain individual IVC filter claims, but the firm has not made a global offer to resolve all lawsuits in the MDL.
Per court reports, the corporation resolved three lawsuits concerning Bard’s Recovery and G2 IVC filters from 2013 to 2015.
Bard IVC Filter payouts by year
2013
Lisa Davis filed a lawsuit against Bard for its G2 IVC filter in federal court in Michigan. She asserted that the gadget fractured and moved to her heart.
According to Davis’ claim, the gadget was the cause of her ongoing cardiac issues. She filed a lawsuit in 2011, and the legal representatives for both sides agreed on a settlement in March 2013.
2014
Kelly and Chris Vlasvich filed a lawsuit in federal court in Illinois against the Bard G2. They contended that the IVC filter fracture damaged Kelly’s heart and lungs.
According to court records, the Vlasvichs and Bard were on the verge of settlement in December 2014. A month later, they requested that the court drop the case.
2015
The Bard Recovery case filed by Kevin Phillips was heard in Nevada court. Phillips claimed that the IVC filter fractured and punctured his heart. Bard resorted to a confidential settlement ten days into the trial.
Cook Verdicts and Settlements
Cook Medical won the MDL’s initial bellwether trial in November 2017.
The judge overseeing the Cook Medical IVC filter MDL held several settlement negotiations between the firm and the plaintiffs who filed claims in 2015 to settle the cases before trial.
Nevertheless, the court initiated pretrial actions a year later and picked the MDL’s inaugural bellwether trials.
The judge dismissed the second bellwether trial, also against Cook Medical, on the premise that the plaintiff did not file the claim on time. The statute of limitations for this case which cited a breach of warranty, was one year.
However, a Texas jury ruled in favor of Jeff Pavlock, a Houston firefighter, in May 2018. The jury awarded him $1.2 million when it discovered that a Cook Celect IVC filter had injured his aorta and small intestine.
This case was not included in the bellwether trials. Cook Medical wants to counter the jury’s judgment.
Boston Scientific Greenfield IVC Filter Lawsuits
Lawsuits also mention the Greenfield filter from Boston Scientific. Greenfield IVC filters are not in any MDL currently, but attorneys have pursued individual lawsuits.
In 2005, Boston Scientific recalled 18,000 Greenfield filters from the market. The manufacturer warned that a piece might detach and result in a lung or heart embolism.
The same year, Boston Scientific announced another recall due to concerns that Greenfield filters could harm blood vessels.
A survey published by the Journal of Cardiovascular Diagnosis & Treatment in 2016 examined IVC filter issues, such as migration, perforation, fractures, and incomplete opening.
The authors referenced a report published in the Journal of Vascular and Interventional Radiology, which found that Greenfield filters had inadequate filter leg distribution in 71 percent of placements.
IVC Filter Recalls and FDA Actions
Between 2005 and 2015, there have been six critical IVC filter recalls. There have not been any other recalls since.
Devices that Bard or Cook Medical have never recalled are often the subjects of IVC filter lawsuits. The FDA maintains a record of IVC filter flaws, and its database contains countless reports on these flaws.
Patients, physicians, and manufacturers file reports whenever there is an issue. About 500 reports were brought in during the first two months of 2018.
The FDA revised a safety communication from 2010 to 2014, instructing physicians to remove retrievable IVC filters as immediately as they are no longer required.
The FDA advised waiting 29 to 54 days after insertion before removing IVC filters.
Questions IVC Filter Attorneys May Ask
Your IVC filter attorney may ask you the following questions to determine if you qualify for compensation:
What complications have you experienced from your IVC filter?
Individuals experiencing filter migration that rendered removal difficult or caused other severe injuries such as blood clots, organ perforation, or filter fracture may qualify for legal action. Your lawyer will want to learn about any problems you’ve had with your IVC filter.
What issues did your IVC filter have?
There has been numerous IVC filter recalls because they had defects, failing to open, tilting, and migration. If your gadget malfunctions, inform your attorney.
When was your IVC filter inserted?
IVC filter lawsuits are increasingly common among individuals whose devices were inserted before 2003. To verify the date of your operation, your IVC filter attorney will want to study your medical records.
What company made your IVC filter?
Bard and Cook Medical manufacture most IVC filters that are the subject of litigation. Nonetheless, individuals have filed separate claims against Boston Scientific and Cordis, two more IVC filter manufacturers. You must find out who manufactured your gadget from the clinician who performed your surgery.
How have your IVC filter complications impacted your daily life?
IVC filter complications might have physical and psychological effects on your life. Your lawyer will determine how much your IVC filter issues have impacted your capacity to perform your everyday tasks.
IVC Filter Lawsuits Will Continue to Surge
The IVC filter lawsuits against Bard and Cook are unlikely to end soon. If an IVC filter caused you harm, consult an experienced lawyer to help with your case.
Your chances of winning will be low if you fight against these major manufacturers alone.
That is why Legal Giant strives to link victims with the best lawyers who can help them gather the evidence, file lawsuits, and negotiate on their behalf to get the maximum compensation.
Contact us for a free case evaluation today.
