McGinnis Defective Mesh Trial Naming CR Bard Continues in New Jersey Court

Bergen Co NJ

Mesh Medical Device News Desk, March 26, 2018 ~ In the product liability trial, Mary McGinnis v. CR Bard, the plaintiff blames two pelvic meshes, made by Bard, for her injuries.

Monday, it enters its second week in a New Jersey courtroom.

This is the first allegedly defective mesh product trial naming CR Bard to be held in New Jersey.

Mary McGinnis and Thomas Walsh McGinnis v. C.R. Bard Inc., et al., case number BER-L-17543-14 is underway in New Jersey Superior Court, Bergen Co. before Judge James DeLuca.

Jury selection took place March 15th in the first New Jersey lawsuit involving C.R. Bard, manufacturer of allegedly defective pelvic mesh implants.

Courtroom View Network is covering the trial gavel-to-gavel and is available for purchase. Mesh News Desk does not have

access to that trial and is compiling evidence from the court appearances on the CVN website here.

Mary McGinnis was implanted with two meshes made by the Murray Hill, New Jersey company - the Avaulta and Align. The polypropylene implants were used to treat pelvic organ prolapse and stress urinary incontinence.

See McGinnis Complaint, Avaulta Jan 2018

Soon afterward she suffered erosion, scar tissue, dyspareunia, loss of bladder functioning, and severe pudendal neuralgia injury and has undergone three separate mesh removal surgeries, the third by Dr. Shlomo Raz of UCLA in June 2016.

That surgery involved extensive groin dissections to remove the transobturator arms of both devices.

She claims she lives in chronic pain from them and that Bard failed to warn the end user doctors.

Bard claims Ms. McGinnis is in pain from previously existing medical conditions.

Adam Slater, Hrymoc trial,Courtroom View Network

Witnesses

Adam Slater, representing Ms. McGinnis called plaintiff witness Adam Silver to the stand March 20th.

Silver is a Vice President of Marketing, Bard Medical Division from Atlanta.

In the 2013 Debra Wise case, Adam Silver was not allowed to testify about Chevron Phillip’s state of mind or intent associated with the Material Safety Data Sheet (MSDS).

The MSDS warned manufacturers, such as Bard, from using any raw polypropylene resin from making implantable medical devices.

Read more on MND here.

That was the first evidence presented in the Cisson v. CR Bard trial in West Virginia in 2013.

Ronald Bracken was a plaintiff witness the same day and appeared in a video recording.

Ronald Bracken, LinkedIn

Bracken researches and develops medical devices for market.

His area of expertise, according to Linked In, is design controls, failure investigations, 510(k) clearances, test methods and polymer science.

He served as a VP for Strategic Initiatives for CR Bard from 2011 to 2013 in Covington, Georgia, which many mesh medical devices are produced. He also served as a VP of Research and Development for Bard’s medical division from 2006 to 2011 where he was responsible for research and development functions.

Jonathan Conta, LinkedIn

He has a Bachelor of Science degree in polymer science from the University of Southern Mississippi.

Jonathan Conta appeared by video recording and was a plaintiff witness March 22. According to LinkedIn, Conta was the key marketing representative on a project team that developed medical devices for the treatment of pelvic organ prolapse.

His bio says he held positions in Corporate Development and Marketing and worked on knee and spine mechanics at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center in Boston. Mr. Conta holds a Bachelor of Science Degree in Biomechanical Engineering from Brown University and an MBA from Northwestern’s Kellogg School of Management.

Attorney Adam Slater will try to convince the jury that the company knew its devices were unsafe and failed to warn the end user doctors about potential risks.

Bard representatives counter that their pelvic mesh products were safe and the warnings were adequate.

Bard Avaulta, Miklos and Moore website

C.R. Bard

Avaulta was removed from the market by Bard in 2012 after the U.S. Food and Drug Administration announced it would require manufacturers to launch three year post-approval monitoring studies, potentially costing millions of dollars.

Align was taken off in 2016.

Bard Align and Adjust

In past pelvic mesh product liability trials, jurors have not been allowed to hear that the products are off the market.

State court in Bergen Co. has a list of 155 similar pending cases against C.R. Bard and 9,091 cases against Gynecare or Ethicon, a subsidiary of Johnson & Johnson, also located in New Jersey.

See Bard case list here. See Gynecare Ethicon case list here.

Meanwhile there are 15,558 cases listed in multidistrict litigation consolidated in federal court in Charleston, WV with 11,047 listed as closed cases. They may mean they are in the process or being settled or remanded back to their original jurisdiction.

Since January 2018, 10 new cases have been added to the C.R. Bard MDL case list.

While this is the first defective product case against Bard in this venue, it is the fourth product liability trial over pelvic meshes made by C.R. Bard.

Cisson facebook

The Scott case ended in a $5.5 million verdict for the plaintiff in a California state court.

The Cisson case ended in a $2 million verdict for the plaintiff in federal court in West Virginia in 2013. A trial in Missouri state court ended in a defense verdict in 2016.

The same lawyer who tried that case, Lori Cohen, of Greenberg Traurig, is representing Bard in the McGinnis trial. ###

LEARN MORE:

MND, March 13, 2018, McGinnis Trial to Start Monday
https://www.meshmedicaldevicenewsdesk.com/mcginnis-pelvic-mesh-trial-bard-start-monday/

MND, March 21, 2018, What we Know from Past TVM Trials (MSDS)
https://www.meshmedicaldevicenewsdesk.com/mcginnis-v-c-r-bard-know-past-tvm-trials/

CafePharma, August 24, 2013, Bard Ignored Internal Memos
http://www.cafepharma.com/boards/threads/bard-ignored-internal-memos-and-doctors%E2%80%99-concerns-over-avaulta-vaginal-mesh.538035/

Debra Wise v C.R. Bard Inc, February 7, 2015
https://www.leagle.com/decision/infdco20150210c43

MND, Bard Opening Arguments in Federal Transvaginal Mesh case, July 9, 2013
https://www.meshmedicaldevicenewsdesk.com/bard-opening-arguments-in-federal-transvaginal-mesh-case/

MND, May 23, 2013, C.R. Bard Lawsuits: Rulings Reveal Company Secrets
https://www.meshmedicaldevicenewsdesk.com/c-r-bard-lawsuits-rulings-reveal-company-secrets/

MND, June 13, 2017, C.R. Bard’s Pelvic Mesh Removed from the Market
https://www.meshmedicaldevicenewsdesk.com/c-r-bards-pelvic-mesh-removed-market/

Materials Safety Data Sheet
Bard Exhibit #200-1 Marlex Mesh MSDS

MND, July 29, 2013, Bard Faces Plaintiff After Mistrial in First Federal Case Against Transvaginal Mesh
https://www.meshmedicaldevicenewsdesk.com/bard-faces-plaintiff-after-mistrial-in-first-federal-case-against-transvaginal-mesh/