The legitimacy of the verdict pertaining the first DePuy ASR hip implant lawsuit has been questioned by Johnson & Johnson and its subsidiary, DePuy Orthopaedics, an online report says, arguing that the decision made by the assigned jury is ambiguous. On April 17 a motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict (JNOV) and a new trial for an alternative were both presented by DePuy to challenge the legitimacy of the court's decision on Loren Kransky’s case. Both motions came about after a conclusion was made for the second DePuy ASR case in which jury sided with the defendants and shifted blame to the United States Food and Drug Administration.

The triggering factor of the motion is the inconsistency of verdicts for the first and second ASR trials. According to DePuy, the verdict of the first ASR case is odd since both lawsuits have presented similar cases and arguments. Unfortunately for DePuy, on May 24 hearing Judge Stephen Czuleger decided to uphold the $8.26 million jury verdict; thus both motions that were raised by the defendants were all declined. The judge says that despite of the second trial’s outcome, the evidence on record in the first trial is sufficient enough for a jury to rationally conclude that the plaintiff’s injury was caused by the defective device.

Out of 10,000 ASR lawsuits filed in the United States, only two has been concluded so far. Recalling ASR lawsuit history, Montana plaintiff Loren Kransky was awarded by jury some $8.26 million in compensatory damages due to injuries caused by a defective implant while defendant Johnson & Johnson was left victorious when assigned jury favored the latter. The sudden change of verdicts was triggered when the court agreed to include Food and Drug Administration’s preliminary assessment as evidence to be used by the defendant in the proceedings. Definitely, jury’s decision for the second ASR lawsuit has brought some hope for DePuy to think that they may still win this battle for the thousands of ASR lawsuits pending in court.

For now anxious spectators are anticipating on what will happen on the upcoming federal ASR lawsuit to commence on September of this year. Although bellwether plaintiff Faye Dorney-Madgitz may be presenting similar claims with the other ASR lawsuits that were already concluded, still no one can tell exactly how the proceeding would go under the multidistrict litigation. Hip lawyers believed that the first bellwether trial is significant since it is possible that the manner of its proceeding may carry weight to awaiting DePuy ASR lawsuits.

Sources:

www.drugwatch.com/2012/07/27/first-trial-dates-set-for-depuy-asr-hip-replacement-lawsuits/

www.lehighvalleylive.com/breaking-news/index.ssf/2013/03/83_million_awarded_in_johnson.html