Day 12- Linda Gross v. Ethicon – A Lifecare Plan for Chronic Pain

//Day 12- Linda Gross v. Ethicon – A Lifecare Plan for Chronic Pain

Day 12- Linda Gross v. Ethicon – A Lifecare Plan for Chronic Pain

Edmond Provder, Gross' lifecare plan, Courtesy Courtroom View Network

Edmond Provder, Gross’ lifecare plan, Courtesy Courtroom View Network

January 28, 2012 ~ Day 12 of the Linda Gross v. Ethicon trial looked at the lifelong losses she faces following a transvaginal mesh implant, Prolift.

On the stand was Edmond Provder, of Occupational Assessment Services, a New jersey firm, who interviewed Linda about her life, her work, her income, her lifestyle for about 8 hr on April 18, 2012.

Thanks to Courtroom View Network for access to this trial.

Born April 30, 1965,  Linda today is in chronic pain. She can only sleep four hours a day with medication. She feels cool and clammy, nauseous, has swelling, increased bowel movement and must self-catheterize four times a day. She is in constant pain and spends all but about four hours a day lying down. She cannot sit more than 20 minutes. Reading and computer work are difficult because of her inability to concentrate.

Gross can drive for about one hour with a special seat. Her family helps with housework. She is able to care for herself in terms of washing and dressing. She is on medication and visiting the  Mayo Clinic pain clinic in March at a cost of $29,000. She is depressed in that she is not enjoying life or any activities. She used to like to camp and fish. Gross is unable to work as a nurse and in hospice care.D12 loss 204k up until feb 2013 economist

Cross Exam

Careful not to blame the victim, the attorney for Ethicon asked if he had taken into account any of the pre-existing conditions Linda experienced such as high cholesterol, numerous surgeries.

Provder said he had not.

Kelly Crawford asked if he met with Linda in person? No, he conducted a phone interview.  Crawford, the attorney for Ethicon asked if he had shopped around for discount medications online.

He said he had averaged online with local brick and brick and mortar pharmacies nearby. Plaintiff attorney David Mazie established that many people do not like to shop for medications online.

He also asked the witness if aging might affect the numbers?

Provder: “Their ability to do things may deteriorate more than the average individual.”

In that case the jury had the discretion to increase the compensation numbers, Mazie said.

Crawford needed to establish Mr. Provder was not in any way assigning blame to Ethicon.

d9 ethicon a j & j company  200


Q: In your report in this case you were asked to look at the global picture of what her needs are? You are not providing the jury with any opinion or saying that any single one of these items is caused by the defendants?

A: “I’m not a causality witness.”

d8 seal of new jerey superior court  123Judge Carol Higbee reminded jurors that information about the cost of living and future losses are opinion and they are the ultimate judge about the reliability of future projections. It’s a difficult situation she said because nobody knows 100% what the future will hold.

Since jurors in this trial are allowed to asked questions, one asked how insurance may impact the big picture. Judge Higbee said she would answer that question at the end of this trial.


Economist Projects Future Losses

Dr. Frank Tinari, economist on future losses

Dr. Frank Tinari, economist on future losses

Dr. Frank Tinari, former Seton Hall professor and Economist, now a consultant, testified as to Gross future losses.  Averaging gross earnings in 2006, of $47,000 in 2006, her last productive year was the the same year she had the Prolift implanted.

So far his estimations show up until February 2013 she has lost $204,000 in income which includes out-of-pocket expenses.

Dr. Tinari estimates a loss in future earnings at $727,000. Adding that to the future value of each component of her lifecare plan, and the income losses so far, he established a $2.8 million in losses as a result of the injuries following her Prolift mesh implant.

Again Ms. Crawford established he was not passing any judgment on Ethicon.

Q:”You are not offering an opinion about any kind of damages, just economic damages?

A:” Agree

Q:”While you do work for plaintiffs and defendants, you testified 70-75% of your work is on behalf of plaintiffs?”

A:”That’s correct.”

Q:”If the defendants have done nothing wrong, if there were no liability, none of these figures matter at all?”

A:”I guess that would be right.”

David Mazie, Mazie Slater Katz & Freeman

David Mazie, Mazie Slater Katz & Freeman

David Mazie came back to establish if health care costs rose above the 1 to 4% he had projected the award could be increased.

By | 2013-01-28T13:30:33+00:00 January 28th, 2013|Legal News|4 Comments

About the Author:

I’m National News Editor, Jane Akre and I began Mesh Medical Device News Desk aka Mesh News Desk (MND) in the summer of 2011 just after the Food and Drug Administration issued an explicit warning to the public that complications associated with surgical mesh used for prolapse repair (POP) and incontinence (SUI) are NOT rare! That was the starting point for the litigation you see today and thousands of lawsuits have been filed by women whose lives have been altered, some permanently, by the use of this petroleum-based product.


  1. `Tammy January 28, 2013 at 8:13 pm - Reply

    Praying for Linda and her family. This medical device has harmed a lot of women.

    • Bill January 29, 2013 at 12:08 pm - Reply

      Funny how our life becomes a number when we often work so hard not to let it be just that. I wonder what Colonel Sanders future earnings would have been worth if he was assessed at 40 when his true fortune wasn’t made till after 60.

      I know at some point that this is what every one of these trials comes down to but if we don’t put a cost associated with negligent behavior then the true loss will never be known.

      ” Most people live life not by the monetary value of a dollar, but by how the impact of what we really value has been changed by its absence or presence.”

      So studies showed 1 in every 3 women in their test had complications and this wasn’t enough to raise a red flag to someone. Makes me sick to my stomach.

  2. Betty January 30, 2013 at 11:25 am - Reply

    Bringing it on down to the $$$, she might have earned . . . Wake up! Her whole life is gone. No amount of $$$ will compensate. She needs so much to just make her comfortable. A full time housekeeper, a nurse in her own home, etc. I hate it that it all comes down to $$$$. That was the problem in the first place. I wonder when they’re going to ask “how much did you set aside for the women you knew ahead of time would be hurt?” It’s a numbers game. I think they figured profit would outweigh loss, and crossed their fingers that it would go better than expected. What about those of us who did not actively “work” in the work-force? Are we less valuable? I worked my butt off and was continually active before all this. They are criminals – playing games with other womens lives for profit.

    • Betty J February 7, 2013 at 1:35 am - Reply

      I agree with the other Betty. As I am one of the ones that have a disability b 4 mesh, but now I am unable to even enjoy my 3 grandchildren, Just this last yr has been hard with on going removels and so much pain unable to to lift my 1 yr old grandbaby like any other young grandparent. Thanks for listening. Hope for that day these types wake up.

Leave A Comment