Zimmer May Have Known Knee Risks, Alleges Lawsuit

A new lawsuit filed on January 5th, 2012, by plaintiff James Furman against Zimmer Inc. is the latest in a number of Zimmer knee lawsuits that alleges Zimmer knew the risks associated with its NexGen knee replacement systems and decided to manufacture and market the devices anyway. The lawsuit, filed in the District Court of Minnesota, by Furman's Zimmer knee lawyer, states that Furman received a Zimmer knee replacement system--the NexGen LPS-Flex femoral component--on July 18 2006. From there, he experienced a number of complications.

Plaintiff experienced Zimmer knee side effects

The complaint filed by Furman's Zimmer knee lawyer states that neither Furman nor his physicians knew of the risks and potential complications associated with Zimmer knee replacement systems at the time, including the NexGen products which have been central in so many Zimmer lawsuits. Not long after he received the device, he began to experience severe side effects, including "severe and debilitating pain after the implant" to the point that his knee joint mobility was limited. Furman was forced to undergo Zimmer knee revision surgery on the 23rd of December, 2008, according to the complaint. 

Zimmer knee side effects associated with surgical technique, company claims

Although a number of patients have come forward with stories of severe Zimmer knee problems, Zimmer continues to claim that problems with NexGen devices do not stem from defects in the products themselves; instead, they place the blame on inadequate surgical technique. However, a number of lawsuits, including Furman's, claim that Zimmer actually knew of the possibility of complications and side effects associated with Zimmer devices, and should have warned patients and medical professionals more thoroughly. 

Furman seeks compensatory and special damages because of his Zimmer knee injuries, asking for more than $75,000 to cover past and present injuries, medical expenses (past and future), lost income, and permanent disability. His Zimmer knee lawyer is also claiming product liability, negligence, and breach of warranty in the Zimmer knee complaint. 

Zimmer NexGen Knee Failure Attorneys Appointed and Case to Proceed

Zimmer knee revision surgery multidistrict litigation (MDL) will begin soon. Several attorneys were recently appointed by U.S. District Judge Rebecca R. Pallmeyer to be the leaders in the litigation. Three attorneys will serve as Co-lead Counsel, one attorney as Liaison Counsel, and approximately twelve will be part of the Plaintiffs’ Steering Committee. A Zimmer NexGen CR-Flex lawsuit was filed in the MDL last August because many people needed knee revision surgery, or suffered from Zimmer NexGen knee failure. The orthopedics giant Zimmer is alleged to be at fault.

The number of plaintiffs filing such suits is growing quite rapidly. When the MDL was first established, and Zimmer knee lawsuits were transferred to the Northern District of Illinois, twenty-eight lawsuits had been filed. Since then, at least seventy-two more were filed and consolidated. Perhaps hundreds more may be filed. That is because many people have experienced problems with the Zimmer NextGen CR-Flex that resulted in knee failure or surgery.

Texas Plaintiff: Lawsuit Moved to Illinois Court for MDL

A man has filed a Zimmer knee lawsuit in Texas, which was recently moved to the multidistrict litigation case that is currently taking place in Illinois. A number of plaintiffs have filed lawsuits through Zimmer knee lawyers that have been consolidated in a multidistrict lawsuit in Illinois. Zimmer knee lawsuits are often similar, although each plaintiff's case is different--however, they are often similar enough that pretrial processes such as discovery are the same, and multidistrict litigation consolidates these processes in order to speed up litigation and expedite the legal process. 

Bob Abell is a Texas resident who received a Zimmer NexGen knee replacement in his right knee in 2009. The next year, he found out that the implant was loose, and in September of 2010 he underwent Zimmer knee revision surgery in order to correct the problems that had been associated with the knee replacement system. Revision surgery is one of the results of Zimmer knee complications that is cited most in Zimmer knee lawsuits. 

Alabama Zimmer Lawsuit Moved to Zimmer Knee MDL

A lawsuit entered the U.S. District Court System in the Southern District of Alabama was filed by Willa J. Crawford, an Alabama resident, on November 23, 2011. This was one of many involving the Zimmer CR Flex implant. Her claim stated that her CR Flex implant had loosened prematurely, and as a result of this and other related Zimmer knee problems Ms. Crawford had to undergo Zimmer knee revision surgery to replace the implant. This lawsuit is not dissimilar from many other Zimmer lawsuits that have been filed across the country. 

Ms. Crawford's Zimmer knee lawsuit was moved to the Zimmer multi district litigation taking place in the U.S. District Court of the Northern District of Illinois earlier this month, on the 4th of January 2012. This move means that the case is being considered along with the other cases that have been filed based on Zimmer knee complaints from patients who have been experiencing Zimmer knee complications and side effects.

Device Failure Leads to Zimmer Knee Lawsuit

Catherine Pollow-Daniels filed her Zimmer knee lawsuit on December 27, 2011 in U.S. District Court in the District of Arizona. Her Zimmer knee lawyer, on behalf of Pollow-Daniels, alleges that the plaintiff's NexGen knee replacement resulted in Zimmer knee failure, forcing the plaintiff to undergo knee revision surgery and suffer personal injury.

Implant Failure Cause for Zimmer Knee Lawsuit

Through her Zimmer knee lawyer, Pollow-Daniels explains that on July 5, 2006, she received a Zimmer NexGen knee implant. Her knee replacement device included two parts – an MIS stemmed tibial component and the NexGen LPS High Flex femoral component – that were later subject to Zimmer knee recall in 2010 due to their tendency to loosen. The plaintiff claims that she began suffering from severe and debilitating pain a short time after surgery, and this eventually led to knee revision surgery in May 2010. According to her Zimmer knee lawsuit, Pollow-Daniels continues to suffer ongoing medical expenses related to her bodily injury.

Zimmer Knee Lawyer Cites Knee Failure Study

The plaintiff alleges that Zimmer was aware of problems with the NexGen knee replacement, particularly device loosening after surgery, and should have disclosed this knowledge to consumers. Her Zimmer knee lawyer cites a peer-review study that was published in 2007 in The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery (British Edition). Researchers surveyed recipients of Zimmer knee replacements and revealed that 38 percent of study participants who had received the LPS high flex knee implants had experienced device loosening within three years of surgery. Approximately half reported that they had to undergo knee replacement surgery to correct the problem.

Lawsuits Seek Zimmer Knee Settlements

The federal Zimmer knee MDL is headquartered in the Northern District of Illinois. Like Pollow-Daniels, these plaintiffs seek compensation from Zimmer in excess of $75,000. In her case, Pollow-Daniels is seeking damages for loss of movement, significant pain, and personal injury. The plaintiff asks the court for compensation for her rehabilitation costs and/or home health care, as well as past and present medical expenses, permanent disability, and loss of income related to Zimmer knee failure.

Zimmer NexGen Knee Failure Lawsuit Filed

Dennis G. Parle filed a Zimmer NexGen knee failure lawsuit in U.S. District Court in the District of Arizona on December 27, 2011. Parle alleges that he suffered Zimmer knee failure, and requests damages for severe pain and bodily harm.

Company Orders Voluntary Zimmer Knee Recall

In his Zimmer knee lawsuit, Parle claims that he received Zimmer's NexGen knee implant on January 26, 2006. His NexGen joint replacement contained two parts – the NexGen MIS Tibial component and the Zimmer NexGen LPS High-flex femoral component – that were later subject to the voluntary Zimmer knee recall of 2010. In September of that year, Zimmer issued a voluntary Class II recall for NexGen TM Tibial Trays, and NexGen MIS Tibial Components and Modular Tibial Plates and Keels. In December 2010, the company voluntarily issued a second Zimmer knee recall, this one for defective parts found in several hundred NexGen LPS knee implants. In both cases, these components reportedly were subject to device loosening after surgery.

Plaintiff Cites Zimmer NexGen Knee Failure

After his surgery in 2006, the plaintiff alleges that he soon began to experience pain related to his knee implant. Parle claims that, as a result of his defective joint replacement, he was forced to undergo Zimmer knee revision surgery and receive a new implant. Parle's Zimmer lawsuit alleges that the manufacturer was, or should have been, aware of problems related to device loosening, and asserts that Zimmer exhibited corporate negligence by failing to notify the public of potential problems. Parle's lawsuit claims that the NexGen Total Knee Replacement System was "reasonably unsafe," and asks the court for damages to compensate for loss of movement, "severe and debilitating pain," and "serious bodily injury and harm."

Zimmer Knee Lawsuits Consolidated in MDL

In August 2011, the U.S. Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation (JPML) voted to consolidate Zimmer NexGen knee failure lawsuits into federal multidistrict litigation (MDL). The MDL is headquartered in the Northern District of Illinois, and already numbered at least 100 lawsuits by November 2011.

Zimmer Knee Problems Lead to MDL

Lawsuits are now popping up throughout the nation over Zimmer Knee Failure due to a breakdown of key elements in the implant, sometimes occurring immediately after the initial knee replacement surgery. Patricia Derenburger’s brought her case to a Zimmer knee lawyer and, much like other litigants; she claims that, shortly after her surgery, she began to suffer from severe pain in her knee. After undergoing a knee revision surgery, which replaced the original implant, Dereburger continued to experience significant pain. On Dec. 13, 2011, Derenburger’s Zimmer Knee Lawsuit was consolidated into the multidistrict litigation (MDL) in the U.S. District Court, Northern District of Illinois. All of the cases involved are currently being overseen by Judge Rebecca Pallmeyer.

Sometimes, high-flex knee devices don’t always deliver as promised. In 2007, a study published in The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery (British Edition) found that 38 percent of patients who underwent total knee replacement with a Zimmer NexGen knee experienced loosening within two years. About half of those patients had to undergo revisions. All litigation involved in the MDL involves common questions of fact. They allege that the Zimmer CR-Flex, LPS-Flex and/or MIS Tibial components are prone to premature loosening, causing affected individuals pain and loss of movement, and often forcing them to undergo revision surgery. The actions also raise factual issues as to whether the Zimmer high-flex components (CR-Flex and LPS-Flex) actually provide an individual with any increase in flexion.

The multidistrict litigation process, more commonly referred to as the Zimmer NexGen MDL, is often confused with a class action lawsuit against Zimmer. While the MDL and a Zimmer NexGen knee class action lawsuit have many similarities during pretrial proceedings, each claim remains an individual lawsuit, where the plaintiff must establish that their injuries were caused by problems with the Zimmer knee design and each claim will be decided individually be a jury. It is expected that hundreds of lawsuits will eventually be filed over Zimmer NexGen knee replacement problems, which involve early failure of the artificial knee and often result in the need for additional revision surgery.