
from Women of Influence, 2018
Mesh Medical Device News Desk, January 31, 2019 – Emmet Awarded $41 Million by Philadelphia Jury Over Mesh injuries
Ethicon has been slammed with $41 million verdict in a Philadelphia product liability case over three of its popular pelvic meshes.
The jury agreed that Gynemesh, Prolift and TVT-O were defective, which led to her injuries and that the company was negligent in manufacturing the medical devices.
Suzanne Emmett was implanted with a Prolift pelvic mesh used to treat pelvic organ prolapse (POP). The Prolift is made by Ethicon (Johnson & Johnson) as was the TVT-O she also received as a treatment for incontinence along with a Gynemesh implant.
The verdict includes $25 million in punitive damages, $15 million in compensation with $1 million going to her husband for loss of consortium.
The trial team won on the negligence claim which includes design and strict product liability.
Under Pennsylvania law there are two ways to win a failure to warn claim – Emmet won under the risk-utility portion as opposed to failure to meet consumer expectations.
The trial which began in November, resumed earlier this month.
In response, J&J told the media in a statement the company believes that the decision contradicts evidence that its pelvic mesh devices were properly designed, and that it appropriately informed surgeons of known risks.
“Pelvic organ prolapse and stress urinary incontinence are serious and debilitating conditions with limited treatment options. Scientists from around the world who have conducted and reviewed independent research on pelvic mesh agree it is an important treatment option for some women. All surgeries to treat these conditions have risks. While we empathize with those who have experienced complications, many women with pelvic mesh see an improvement in their day to day lives.”
TVT-O has been found to be defectively designed in at least two previous cases- Huskey and Batiste.
Prolift has been found to be defective in its design in previous mesh trials – Hrymoc, Beltz, Hammons and Kaiser.

Kila Baldwin, Kline Specter
Ms. Emmett claims her injuries are permanent, and she suffered mental and physical pain, an inability to have sexual relations, as well as economic loss. The mesh allegedly eroded into her vagina and left a scar plate and vaginal deformation. She experienced frequent and chronic urinary tract infection and inflammation.
For 30 years Emmett has worked handling workers’ compensation cases for an insurance company. She still goes to work.
She is represented by Kila Baldwin and Elia Robertson of Kline Specter.
Attorneys for Ethicon are Tarek Ismail, Anita Modak Truran and Joe O’Neil.
There is no word yet on whether the company plans an appeal, but that is customarily what happens.
Of the seven pelvic mesh product liability trials so far in the Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas- Plaintiffs have won five totaling $105.16 million.
Baldwin’s next trial for plaintiff Ms. A. Sutphin will be in April in Charleston, West Virginia, home of multidistrict litigation facing seven different manufacturers of polypropylene pelvic meshes. At one time there were in excess of 104,000 cases filed there from all over the country.
Sutphin has sued Johnson & Johnson and its Ethicon division over the TVT-O implant she received.
How many juries have to rule it defective before its recognized and things will be resolved for the other thousands of women? The system is failing its people disgracefully here.
Well done! Now if we could get the settlement offers inline with these court outcomes?
Congratulations Kila Baldwin and Elia Robertson and Dr Margolis on a job well done for Suzanne Emmet💕#AllMeshedUp
Thank You! Kline Specter for never loosing site of your clients and (their) best interest. Many of us (victims) has the utmost respect for your honorable, trustworthy attorneys/firm.
That is me not giving up,they told me I have only 5percent I am goin to take them to the cleanse to day it was get all pill and od. The pain I have worked through since 1997 as I said someone has to pay the bills no partner to do it.
I’m so happy for this woman for getting what she deserved. My only question is how come this is so unfair. I am a woman who was crippled by mesh in 2012. And yet my offer is so much less than this. I was pushed into settling by an attorney who lied to me. He said he would take it to court but then at the end said he would not. No reason why really just saying his partners wanted to be done with mesh. My question is how in the world do we justify some of us who are crippled and in pain every day and trying to hang on to her house and our life Getting literally very small settlements while others get millions and millions and millions. Don’t get me wrong I am so glad for this woman good job. But it just seems like the MDL was set up and is the most awful example of justice in the United States these days. I’ve been told it only 3 to 5% of the women are catastrophically hurt and I fall into that title. I don’t even know what my new normal is because the pain everyday is horrible and always different and yet the same. I just wish the awards would be bigger because we have no way of taking care of ourselves now. We will have medical bills rest of our lives and these settlements are not going to cover that. I just wish all the attorneys would have fought as hard as these turn attorneys have. But some of these attorneys just want a quick buck and that’s why they went out got lots and lots of the clients. I really a sad what’s happened to too many of us. So all we can do is rejoice in this lady’s award and pray when the dust all settles she still has this money. My hat’s off to her attorneys.
You can blame your attorney but what if that’s all the manufacturer would offer? What if they went bankrupt? What do you expect a lawyer to do if he, she fought hard? Let’s remember who is to blame originally? I’m sorry though. It’s not right.
Sandy…The New York Times printed an article about one of our mesh sisters yesterday, 2/01/2019. This article has given me a sense of calm. Search for it online. The article was written by Matthew Goldstein, a version of this article appears in print on page B1 of the New York edition with the headline:
For Women, It Was Painful. For Lawyers, It Was Profitable.
Sandy,
Why did you accept the settlement? Lawyers does not have the right to push you.
For many people it is accept what’s offered or get nothing….what would you choose?
I am elated for her. Her attorneys did a great job. It is not a fair system. It never has been.
I am currently paying $1886 a month for insurance and approximately $36,000 a year on medical expenses. I have had 20 surgeries in the last 9 1/2 years. Hopefully I’m done. But I think this will be the last one, and then not. My husband has stood by me, Thank God! I’d be on the streets, but for his integrity.
Judge Goodwin granted the 5% common benefit fund on January 30, 2019. The New York times published a story on February 1, 2019, about Sherise Grant, a mesh surviver, Ms. Grant, in like manner, joins thousands of mesh victims who are disappointed with and questions the legal logistics of this MDL ordeal. Matthew Goldstein, the author of the article:
For Women, It Was Painful, For Attorneys, It Was Profitable.
Matthew Goldstein, the NYT’s author of this timely piece investigates white collar crimes provides a link in the story that gives victims a chance to voice their concerns.
However Mr. Goldstein, as other mainstream reporters, completely avoids placing any blame on the white collar criminal acts perpetrated by the mesh makers who knowingly and recklessly put on the market devices they knew would cause great harm and they knew could not be removed. I’m sorry the media has not told that story.
When some attorneys analyzed the potential financial gain of this horrible injustice, (yes) caused by the pharmaceutical giants, (some) attorneys jumped in this horrible MDL process and simultaneously added more injury to the victim. Instead of fighting to balance this horrible injustice many firms just simply ignored the interest of their clients and lined their bank accounts with Millions defrauded from the settlements of the permanently injured victims. Basically defrauding the unsuspecting, clueless victims that are unaware of their Constitutional Rights… first.by seizing the Plaintiffs (victims) legal personal property, our (cases), trapping the Plaintiff’ cases in a process that can’t be opted-out of, denying/ignoring our Constitutional Rights to Due Process, and additionally deny us of any involvement in the legal decisions that will ultimately effect our entire lives, permanently.
The attorney (firm) that purchased my case from the 800 infomercial, placed my case in this MDL Statute before having any conversation about the MDL process or an agreement with me to do so.
The attorneys are responsible for (their) legal actions, involvement in this nightmare.
Just one clarification. The attorneys do not place cases in an MDL. A panel of 7 federal judges set up an MDL when there are lots of cases filed presumably to consolidate discovery and have quicker resolutions. This happens many times in product liability cases because the medical terminology and case specifics are so technical. The theory is that there are better outcomes when one judge handles these complicated cases instead of judges all over the US trying to stay ahead of the curve. The attorneys do not determine where their individual cases are heard when the federal court system gets involved in these mass torts. There are 70+ product liability cases in federal MDL courts right now. I say in theory because we all know that has not happened with mesh and more than likely other MDL jurisdictions. I think this is where the case against MDLs could be made.
Glad this woman won her lawsuit. J&J Ethicon have known for years that their medical device was defective and causing serious medical problems for women. I have records (from my FDA complaint investigation) that shows Elthicon failed to report over 100 adverse event reports. The FDA should have fined them thousands of dollars but they did nothing. The FDA is just as bad as the manufacturers.
My lawyer filed my case in 2010. I have not gotten anything yet. I have a transvaginal mesh. It eroded through the vaginal wall and l had to have a revision which didn’t work. I have vaginal scarring with pain constantly.
Which manufacturer and what does your lawyer say when you call? Have they filed your case and do they give you regular updates? I certainly hope so. It sounds as if you had a partial revision which often does not work. Can you seek out a full revision? Do you need the name of a doctor near you? Please let me know janeakre@meshnewsdesk.com