Mesh Medical Device News Desk, April 12, 2019 ~ Neurological Injuries: Path More Certain. Sponsored Content. Dr. Greg Vigna, JD, talks about his continued focus on pelvic mesh injuries with a neurological or nerve injury component.
Since the Vaginal Mesh Multidistrict Litigation in West Virginia closed to new cases in the June 21, 2018 order by Judge Joseph Goodwin, the path to adequate compensation has become more certain for injured women with a neurological diagnosis caused by transvaginal mesh devices.
Greg Vigna, MD, JD, a damages expert, practicing physician, and national pharmaceutical injury attorney, talks about this focus.
Q: How does this help the injured?
“First, the June 21, 2018 order requires the cases of newly injured women to be filed in State Court. When I say newly injured that refers to old implants that become symptomatic and newly implanted slings that cause new injuries. We have two pudendal neuralgia cases filed in State Court since the close of the MDL so we are able to work these cases up like a normal catastrophic personal injury case which they are.”
Q: What do you mean normal personal injury case?
“It allows us to simply look at the device and the medical records to determine if the injuries claimed match up to the defect of the device and determine if we have causation. If there is causation, then simply looking at damages will determine if we go forward. Damages is past financial harm from medical bills, past and future lost wages, and cost of future care medical and non-medical via a life care plan. It involves vocational rehabilitation experts to discuss vocational loss, life care planners, and an economist to prove the economic damages.”
Q: Why is there a perception that these cases are difficult?
“The Discovery provided by the leadership of the Plaintiff Steering Committee was more than adequate for General Causation and the internal documents that lead to punitive damages have been discovered by the exhausting work provided by the leadership. All the Daubert issues have been settled. My team have been and are developing our own experts for specific causation for the neurological diagnoses.”
Q: So, these cases are not difficult?
“When I say not difficult, I believe the science as it relates to why these devices are defective match up with the severe neurological injuries. They are expensive cases to take forward and requires experienced pharmaceutical plaintiff injury attorneys. The attorneys on my team have been in court for decades against pharmaceutical companies in the vaginal mesh litigation, other national litigations including IVC Filters, Big Tobacco, and Mesothelioma cases.”
Q: What is the risk of going forward with a lawsuit?
“In every case there is the risk of a loss despite a perfectly litigated case. Severely injured women will have to weigh the risk of proceeding past the certainty of the Matrix Settlements and uncertainty of individual litigation. My experienced litigation team will discuss and evaluate this risk with each potential client.”
Q: Why has your focus been on neurological injures?
“I believe the neurological diagnoses are the most injured. The lives of women with pudendal neuralgia, obturator neuralgia, and Complex Regional Pain Syndrome have been destroyed. These women must receive the compensation they deserve so they can rebuild their lives. They are often divorced, homeless, and require assistance for basic activities of daily living by their families. Others are struggling with severe pain every day while they go to work just to get by financially.”
Q: So, your focus is only neurological injures?
“No, I look at all injuries but understand the cases I accept to go forward in the Wave Discovery Process required by the MDL or new injury cases are those who are disabled or nearly disabled to a certain degree and have a measurable impact on their lives.” ##
Greg Vigna, MD, JD, PLC