Metal-on-Metal Hip Joint Replacement Lawsuits Produce Two Major Verdicts
Courts have been moving very slowly throughout 2020 and now into early 2021 due to the ongoing pandemic’s closures and restrictions. However, at least two recent products liability cases stemming from metal hip joint replacements have concluded with significant jury verdicts in favor of the plaintiffs—both of these cases related to the Biomet M2a Magnum metal-on-metal hip joint replacement devices.
Millions of people worldwide have received hip replacement devices. For most people, these replacements are very beneficial, relieving pain and improving mobility and overall health. Unfortunately, however, many of these devices may be problematic or even defective. A large study of joint replacement data in Britain, for example, found that some 13% of all joint replacements required some sort of corrective surgery within five years. In addition to mechanical failure of the devices and other problems with their physical implantation and use, the metal-on-metal types are particularly prone to flaking off tiny bits of metal into the patients’ bodies, resulting in metal poisoning or metallosis.
The Biomet M2a line of replacement joints has been in use since the mid-1990s, with more than 100,000 being implanted in just a ten-year period in the early 2000s. Despite their popularity, the joints have been problematic and have spawned numerous personal injury cases related to their tendency to dislocate, shed fine metal particles, and require corrective surgeries.
Multiple Joint Dislocations and Corrective Surgeries
The first case was in Missouri, where a jury decided that a defective metal-on-metal hip joint implant had caused serious injuries to the plaintiff who received the implant, as well as a loss of consortium damages to the plaintiff’s husband.
The plaintiff received dual hip joint replacements some 12 years earlier with the Biomet M2a Magnum model metal-on-metal devices. Within only two years after surgery, she experienced significant pain, and her first corrective surgery took place only a year after that. Since then, the plaintiff has had eleven dislocations in the joints and an additional six corrective surgeries.
The plaintiff’s attorney showed at trial that the manufacturer should have been aware that the M2a metal-on-metal device was defective because it was largely based on an earlier model, which itself had had numerous problems.
The jury agreed and awarded the plaintiff twenty million dollars for her injuries, as well as one million dollars to the plaintiff’s husband, plus litigation costs and interest.
Metal Particles Shed into Recipient’s Body
The second trial concluded with a successful verdict for its plaintiff was in Iowa and involved the same Biomet M2a Magnum metal-on-metal hip joint. In that case, the implant was losing fine bits of metal in the plaintiff’s body, causing severe pain and rising levels of chromium in the plaintiff’s tissues. One revision surgery had already been required by the time of trial.
In this case, the jury against Biomet award slightly more than $1 million in damages to the plaintiff, plus an additional punitive damages award of $2.5 million.
Sacramento Metal on Metal Hip Implant Injury Lawyer
I’m Ed Smith, a Sacramento hip implant attorney. If you or a family member has experienced problems with a metal-on-metal (MoM) joint implant, including the Biomet M2a Magnum product, please reach out to us for free, friendly advice. We can be contacted at (916) 921-6400 or toll-free at (800) 404-5400.
We are members of the Million Dollar Advocates Forum and the National Association of Distinguished Counsel.
Please check our Verdicts and Settlements page for examples of our past cases.
Our client reviews can be found on Avvo, Google, and Yelp, and more information about our office and services can be found on our website, AutoAccident.com.
:gm cha [cs 633]