Top Drug Lawsuits
|Plaintiffs Seek Stryker Metal Hip Implant Lawsuit Consolidation|
- Thursday, 25 October 2012 03:00
Plaintiffs Seek Stryker Metal Hip Implant Lawsuit Consolidation
By Andrea Gressman
According to recent Stryker hip implant lawsuits, the Plaintiffs who filed against Stryker Orthopaedics regarding its badly designed Stryker Rejuvenate and ABG II hip implant devices seek consolidation of their Stryker hip implant lawsuits that they filed in New Jersey. The first 10 plaintiffs and their Stryker lawsuit lawyers requested multicounty litigation designation of their lawsuits through filing a petition.
Multicounty litigation status like the Stryker hip implant lawsuits are seeking in a state court mirrors an MDL in a federal court system. They do have the same purpose, however, and that is to speed up the trials' discovery phases, which are beneficial to both the plaintiffs and defendants. The discovery phase entails evidence gathering and testimony provisions to determine what will be allowed for use in court. When cases such as a Stryker hip implant lawsuit have many similar claims and is very close in their scope, it is faster and more beneficial to consolidate them into a multicounty litigation.
A Stryker multicounty litigation and a Stryker multidistrict litigation would differ from a Stryker class action lawsuit in that the trials and settlements are individualized according to the plaintiffs following the discovery phrase consolidation. In class action lawsuits, any judgments or monetary awards are split among the participants of the lawsuit, as per their agreements.
Stryker Hip Implant Lawsuits Could Potentially Be Overseen by Same Judge Overseeing DePuy Hip Implant Lawsuits
Patients coming forward claiming injury from Stryker hip implant devices come from New Jersey, Florida, Arizona, and Minnesota. They propose that Bergen County Superior Court in Hackensack, New Jersey, be the location for the multicounty litigation due to its close proximity to the defendant's HQ. Additionally, the judge presiding over that court, the Honorable Brian Martinotti, is experienced in cases of a similar nature, ones that involve metal-on-metal hip implants deemed defective. The DePuy ASR hip implant lawsuits are being overseen by him as well.
Stryker’s Rejuvenate and ABG II modular-neck hip stems are in the hot seat. These metal-on-metal hip implant devices were marketed as an option for allowing patients a better fit with their hip implants due to the possibility of customization using different parts. Surgeons working with the Rejuvenate hip have six stems and 16 necks to work with, while the Stryker ABG II offers 10 necks and 16 stems designed to work cooperatively with each other.
Problems with Stryker Metal-on-Metal Hip Implant
The problem arises with the neck and stem parts being comprised of metal conjunctions, which, stated by Stryker, is the cause of problems almost identical to those found in the DePuy metal-on-metal hip implants. Patients of the Stryker hip implant suffer intense pain and early failure of their hip replacement devices due to the grinding of metal parts against each other, causing metal fatigue and making them wear out sooner. Most artificial hip implants can endure for an average of about 15 years, but the Rejuvenate and ABG modular hip implants fail after just a few months, according to some reports. Metallosis (poisoning of the bloodstream) is an on-going problem with all metal hip implants.
Although the Stryker Rejuvenate hip implant only came on the market in February of 2009, Stryker recalled the Rejuvenate and AGB II metal hip implant on July 6, 2012.
If you or someone you know experienced negative side effects due to the Stryker hip implant, visit the Stryker Metal Hip Implant Recall Class Action Lawsuit Investigation page. Speak with an experienced Stryker lawsuit attorney right away to learn about your legal options.
Updated October 25th, 2012
All medical device, dangerous drug and medical class action and lawsuit news updates are listed in the Drug and Medical Device section of Top Class Actions.
Top Class Actions Legal Statement
Last Updated on Thursday, 27 December 2012 11:09