Insurance Dispute Lawyer Blog

DePuy ASR Hip Recall Demonstrates Flaws in System; What to Do If Your Hip Implant Fails

Published on: October 6, 2010 | By Berniard Law Firm

The recall of DePuy ASR Hip implants by the company and its parent corporation Johnson & Johnson demonstrates a problem that has has raised the ire of watchdog groups for years. This device, designed to replace the failing hip of individuals across the United States, is merely one in a line of products that have been recalled by Johnson & Johnson this year and in the past decade. The orthopedics division, in particular, has been hit especially hard and extensive criticism has befallen CEO Bill Weldon.

When a company faces consistent problems with their sold goods, especially at the manufacturing stage, suits develop alleging product defect. As information has come out that indicates DePuy may have known of problems relating to their hip implant some three years ago in 2007 raises the legal assertion of negligence. Failing to notify the public that their product was causing problems has put many up in arms, and rightfully so. The amount of pain, suffering, lost time and emotional distress that undergoing revision surgery has caused patients who have the DePuy implant is significant.

Some are wondering just what can be done if their orthopedic device is failing. The first step that can be taken is to begin immediately documenting expenses related to the failed implant. Whether doctor appointments, prescriptions, travel expenses, etc., all of these records should be written down. Doing so can help you and your attorney while calculating your damages related to this matter. The courts will be in charge of calculating pain and suffering damages and other extraneous efforts you and your attorney may pursue but this is one specific and tangible way in which you can help your attorney best introduce your case.

Court to Katrina Flood Victim: Follow the Rules When Making an Insurance Claim

Published on: October 4, 2010 | By Berniard Law Firm

As many Gulf Coast residents unfortunately know, standard homeowner’s insurance policies do not include coverage for flooding. In order to assist property owners in Louisiana and other states in protecting themselves against floods from hurricanes, tropical storms, and other severe weather, Congress created the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) in 1968. NFIP offers flood insurance to homeowners, renters, and commercial property owners in communities that participate in the NFIP. In order for a community to be eligible to participate, it must agree to adopt and enforce certain building standards that are designed to reduce the risk of flood damage. According to the NFIP, flood damage is reduced by nearly $1 billion each year as a result of the floodplain management standards implemented by these communities. Also, structures that are built to NFIP standards experience approximately 80 percent less damage annually than those not built to the standards. The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) manages the administrative functions of the NFIP, including the claims process. As one Katrina victim recently learned, homeowners who file claims under the NFIP must closely follow the rules contained in their policies.

Violet Collins, a resident of New Orleans, maintained a flood insurance policy through the NFIP to cover her house and its contents. The structure was insured for $225,000 and the contents for $12,500. When the home sustained flood damage during Hurricane Katrina, Collins contacted FEMA to provide notification of the damage. FEMA sent an adjuster to her house to inspect the damage and arrange for payment from FEMA. Collins later submitted additional documentation for damage that the adjuster had overlooked, and FEMA issued her two more checks. Some time later, Collins filed a suit against the NFIP which alleged that the payments on her flood claims were insufficient. The NFIP filed a motion for summary judgment on the basis that Collins failed to file a proof of loss as required by the insurance policy and was therefore barred from seeking additional money. The district court granted NFIP’s motion, and Collins appealed.

After reaffirming that it must “strictly construe and enforce” the flood policy’s requirements, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals asserted that “an insured’s failure to provide a complete, sworn proof of loss statement, as required by the flood insurance policy, relieves the federal insurer’s obligation to pay what otherwise might be a valid claim.” Gowland v. Aetna, 143 F.3d 951, 954 (5th Cir. 1998). The court noted that, ordinarily, the proof must be submitted within 60 days of the loss, but that FEMA extended the window for Hurricane Katrina claims to one year. Nevertheless, Collins never submitted any proof of loss; the court examined Collins’s arguments for why she was not required to file one. Her first argument was that FEMA had waived the requirement altogether, a contention that the court quickly dispensed with by citing well-settled case law on the same question. Second, Collins asserted that the NFIP waived the filing requirement in a letter she received from an insurance adjuster. However, the court concluded this was not possible because “federal regulations provide that no provision of the policy may be altered, varied, or waived without the express written consent of the Federal Insurance Administrator,” which was not given. Finally, Collins argued that because she suffers from a debilitating eye disease, she was excused from observing the filing requirement. In response, the unsympathetic court stated that “Collins, however, fails to explain why Louisiana tort law would apply to her claim for flood insurance proceeds or why, if applicable, this would exempt her from our precedent requiring strict compliance with the … proof-of-loss requirements.” Accordingly, the court affirmed the district court’s dismissal of Collins’s suit.

This case serves as a reminder that, even in the aftermath of such massive natural disasters as Hurricane Katrina, flood victims are still expected to follow the specific requirements of their NFIP insurance policies when seeking payment for flood-related losses. Although it may seem cruel to reject a flood victim’s appeal for a fair pay-out, the courts have put policyholders on notice that they will not entertain requests to alter the terms of the policies. For this reason, victims of any flood should seek the help of a qualified attorney who can help them navigate the steps required to fully collect on their flood insurance policies.

Legal Rights Under the ASR Hip Replacement Recall

Published on: October 2, 2010 | By Berniard Law Firm

When people undergo surgery to repair an injured joint or body part, they hope that life will return to as close to “normal” as possible. Despite the fact that surgery is an extensive process that can be taxing mentally and physically on the patient, people obviously expect the best due to the amount of time, money and pain that goes into it. When thousands of DePuy ASR hip recipients began to experience problems with their implant, the idea that another surgery to remedy the matter was likely the last thing they had to hear. However, with a recall in full swing for the tens of thousands of people who received the ASR hip implant, this is the unfortunate reality.

This blog has covered the extensive details relating to this matter because it stands as a clear example of a company attempting to maintain the semblance of success while secretly knowing the truth about their product. Reports indicate that as early as 2007 DePuy, and its parent company Johnson & Johnson, became aware that there were problems with the implant, yet waited until 2010 to issue a recall. What’s more, this is not the first implant the companies were forced to recall. This fact is crucial because it lends credibility to patient complaints that the companies failed in their duty to provide a safe and well-manufactured product.

Left in the dark about the problems relating to their implant, recipients now ask what their options are. Representing a variety of patients who have experienced problems, our firm is now accepting clients who are suffering problems with their DePuy ASR hip implant. Whether suffering from limited mobility, increased pain, a lack of flexibility, metal-on-metal grinding or several other symptoms of a failing implant, patients whose replacement has gone awry are entitled to damages. Even those who have already undergone corrective surgery to fix complications relating to their implant can pursue a case against DePuy and its parent company Johnson & Johnson.

Symptoms of Recalled, Faulty DePuy Hip Implant Can Be Too Much For Recipients to Handle

Published on: September 30, 2010 | By Berniard Law Firm

The DePuy ASR Hip System, which has recently been deemed unworthy of use and subsequently recalled, has caused thousands of individuals severe pain, discomfort, and difficulty performing daily tasks that were once easy to carry out due to its failure. Lawsuits have been filed against Johnson & Johnson and their unit DePuy for numerous claims including negligent design and the manufacture of a defective product that has caused severe damage and injury. Individual complaints have included pain, swelling, and difficulty walking for years after the DePuy ASR Hip System is implanted. This is deeply troubling, since over 93,000 individuals have received the ASR implant, and now 12-13% are experiencing considerable problems. These numbers indicate that thousands upon thousands of individuals who relied upon a successful implant have suffered difficulties and problems related to the DePuy hip implant.
The majority of plaintiffs in the lawsuits against Johnson & Johnson and DePuy claim significant medical problems associated with the ASR Hip System. The stories of the affected individuals are upsetting due to the severe hardships they have encountered as a result of having a surgery that was intended to help and not hurt them. For instance, one woman who underwent the hip operation in 2006 began to instantly experience severe hip pain, preventing her from standing for long periods of time or even sleeping comfortably. Further, her hip dislocated twice within a two year time span. After consulting her physician, she was advised to get a corrective surgery, called revision surgery, to completely remove the DePuy ASR Hip System. After she received the corrective surgery, it was discovered that she was suffering from severe metallosis which happened as a result of the metal on metal DePuy implant rubbing against itself and causing friction. This friction, in turn, created metal shavings that deposited in the metal socket of the device as well as her surrounding soft tissue. This condition can make revision surgery difficult for the operating physician and, thus, creates a danger for the individual receiving the operation. Additionally, it was discovered that the metallosis caused detachment of and degeneration to her hip abductor muscle. The fact that she experienced pain, discomfort, and a constant fear of further surgery for over three years illustrates the serious impact the DePuy Hip System has had upon individual’s lives.
Significantly, the revision surgery is necessary for 1 out of every 8 individuals who have received the DePuy ASR Hip System. However, many report that the pain from having the initial surgery and complications due to the implant is not completely solved by having the second corrective surgery. Many individuals, post revision surgery, require a cane or walker to get around and may experience trouble moving or bending at the waist. Thus, the pain and difficulty performing everyday activities continues as a result of having the initial DePuy implantation.
If you have received the DePuy Total Hip System, and have experienced pain and discomfort, contact the Berniard Law Firm. You do not have to go through this ordeal alone. The Berniard Law Firm will provide the best advice and guidance and is fully capable of meeting your litigation needs.

Report Indicates DePuy Knew About ASR Hip Implant Problems in 2007, Delayed Recall Until Late 2010

Published on: September 28, 2010 | By Berniard Law Firm

Johnson & Johnson’s DePuy Orthopedics unit has recently recalled two hip implant products, the ASR XL Ace tabular System and the ASR Hip Resurfacing System. The recall was announced in late August 2010, yet reports have surfaced showing that DePuy may have been aware of problems relating to their hip implant product as far back as 2007. This means that thousands of individuals received the hip implant system and may have been subjected to needless pain and suffering, had the product been recalled when the problems were first brought to DePuy’s attention.

The DePuy Hip Implant System was recalled after data revealed that 12-13% of individuals who received the implant system needed a second corrective surgery to remedy problems related to the DePuy product. The issues that the hip implant has caused individuals is concerning to say the least, the metal on metal hip implant has led many to suffer bone fractures, broken bones, and metallosis, which is when friction of a metal device produces metal shavings that become deposited in the socket of the device and in the surrounding soft tissue. Additionally, individuals have reported experiencing hip pain, loosening of the hip implant, the implant failing completely, additional surgery, and difficulty performing daily tasks that were once easy to do. The fact all of these problems have been occurring after having an implant that was supposed to offer freedom from these very problems is a significant problem.

Over the years, negative reports of the hip implant system grew steadily, with over 100 reports made in 2007, 200 in 2008, and over 300 in 2009. However, DePuy waited until 2010 to recall the product. In fact, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has released records which show that, as early as 2008, they received hundreds of complaints on the hip implant system in the United States. This has led the FDA to closely monitor parent company Johnson & Johnson since the hip implant system is the 11th recalled product in the past 11 months for the companies. In addition, the FDA sent DePuy on August 19, 2010, a warning letter requiring the company to halt the sale and production of two of the company’s products (a knee replacement device and a hip implant device) because they were both without FDA’s marketing clearance and in violation of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA).

Individuals who have received a DePuy ASR hip implant are advised to contact legal representation. Financial compensation may be available against Johnson & Johnson and DePuy as a result of the negligent design of the device and the failure to warn recipients about the risk of problems or issue an ASR hip recall earlier. If you have received the ASR hip implant system, than please contact the Berniard Law Firm. The Berniard Law Firm is fully capable of meeting your litigation needs by providing consistent, viable advice and guidance that you can depend on.

DePuy ASR Hip Implant Recipients Likely Entitled to Negligence-Related Damages

Published on: September 26, 2010 | By Berniard Law Firm

Recently, lawsuits have been filed against Johnson and Johnson’s orthopedic division, DePuy Orthopedics, Inc., for injuries caused by the ASR XL Acetabular System and the DePuy ASR Hip Resurfacing System. Both of these metal on metal hip implants have been recalled as a result of the exceptionally high number of individuals experiencing severe pain and discomfort after having the hip implantation. Reports released by DePuy show that 1 in 8 individuals who received the ASR total hip replacement needed revision surgery in order to correct the first implantation. One form of the revision surgery takes the DePuy device completely out of the individual and implants a different device or resettles it to fit the joints properly while others merely reattach and fit the device upon the bone more properly. Numerous issues have arisen as a result of these hip products, many of which have caused individuals significant hardships in their daily lives.

Lawsuits filed against DePuy and Johnson & Johnson allege that the companies are strictly liable for the defective product they put on the market worldwide. Complaints about the two metal on metal hip implants go back as far as 2005; yet, the company just recently recalled the products in 2010. This has allowed over 93,000 individuals to receive the implant and, for too many, be subjected to pain, discomfort, and, most likely, a second corrective surgery. This surgery is carried out to prevent the device from loosening and causing hip fractures, device malalignment, dislocation, and even bone breakage. DePuy acknowledges that the product may even cause Metallosis, a complication of metal-containing total joint replacements that involves the metal rubbing together and causing parts to fragment. This is a serious issue, especially in light of the fact that, if revision surgery is needed, this soft tissue damage may complicate the operation and in turn, the individual’s health.

During the Post implantation period, individuals who have had the surgery have described pain and discomfort on a daily basis, making even the most simple daily activities a challenge. Thus, the lawsuits focus primarily on the fact that DePuy had a duty to consumers not to introduce into the market a product that was defective and dangerous. There is various atttributes of each cause of action that will now be discussed in turn.

Strict Liability in Tort
Plaintiffs are suing DePuy for strict liability, which means that the court will hold the manufacturer responsible for the goods and products they produce, especially if they cause consumers injury. Significantly, DePuy had a duty of care to the plaintiffs/consumers to manufacture, distribute, and/or sell reasonably safe products that were fit for use by consumers. This duty was breached by DePuy, in our opinion, because a failure or omission to do what the company is bound by law to do took place. The fact that DePuy manufactured, distributed, and/or sold the defective products, placing them into the stream of commerce and jeopardizing consumers health illustrates DePuy’s breach of duty. Additionally, under strict liability, DePuy’s products resulted in individual’s being injured and experiencing ongoing pain and discomfort, thus, allowing DePuy to be held responsible for introducing to consumers a dangerous product.

Further, patients with the implant contend they suffered injury and damages as a direct and proximate result of the defective and unreasonably dangerous condition of the DePuy ASR Hip System, and that they would not have used the product had they known of the serious consequences. A proximate result is traceable directly to an act or omission, without the occurrence of another culpable and efficient agency intervening. Thus, the serious problems these patients experienced as a result of having DePuy’s product implanted was the proximate result of placement of an unreasonably dangerous product into the stream of commerce. Further, DePuy did not place any warnings or even instructions on the product to place the plaintiff/consumer on notice of any potential product risk, and, therefore, the company is subject to liability for placing a dangerous product into the stream of commerce and causing individual’s injuries as a result of the dangerous product.

Negligence
Because DePuy’s product was designed to go into the human body, the utmost care and safety should have been taken in order to protect individual’s health. DePuy had a duty to exercise reasonable care to sell reasonably safe medical devices so as not to subject the ultimate consumer to an unreasonable risk of harm. To have a metal on metal hip implant potentially fracture or break bones in the hip area, or release shredded metal component parts damaging soft tissue, does not illustrate DePuy’s reasonableness in distributing such a dangerous defective product. Therefore, those who have received the implant would assert, through their attorney, that DePuy was negligent, careless, reckless, grossly negligent, and wanton, and breached their duties in the manufacture, distribution, and sale of the DePuy ASR Hip System.

DePuy manufactured a product that they now acknowledge was not proper for public use and in need of further testing and analysis. More than 90,000 people have received DePuy implants and are, thus, in danger of going through a second surgery or having their daily lives severely affected because of pain and discomfort. Many say that DePuy actually failed to warn hospitals and patients that the ASR Hip System was defective and that the company placed and permitted the placement of the hip implant into the stream of commerce when DePuy knew or should have known that the product was defective and unsafe for individuals to have implanted in their bodies. Also, DePuy failed to employ corrective safety mechanisms to limit the harm caused by the hip implant, and did not properly and adequately test and inspect the product before selling it worldwide. As the defective product became widely utilized and placed thousands in jeopardy, our firm asserts that the company knowingly placing the dangerous product into the stream of commerce and causing injuries.

DePuy has had complaints dating back to 2005, yet, the defective products were not recalled until 2010. As such Depuy failed to keep abreast of and/or react appropriately to public, government, and/or industry studies, information, documentation, and recommendations and may be deemed negligent.

Due to the suffering that patients underwent, both physically and mentally due to the trauma of going through pain, discomfort, and the threat of a second surgery, DePuy is arguably the cause of these injuries due to the expectations placed upon a manufacturer. Individuals relied on the safety of the product to feel confident enough to follow through with having such an invasive procedure. The fact that they are now physically injured is a result of trusting a company to put out a safe product, not one that would imperil their daily routines and lives.

Beyond all of this, what is beginning to draw even more ire towards Johnson and Johnson is the extensive time (five years) that it took for the company to recall the hip implants despite receiving data and responses that indicated a significantly high number of patients were suffering pain and discomfort related to the product. What’s more, the need for a second corrective surgery was a reported fact the company was aware of over time as revealed by their recent document releases relating to the recall.

Individuals who received the implants and have suffered the myriad of symptoms relating to it are likely entitled to monetary damages under the law. By hiring an attorney, individuals who have suffered pain, financial hardship, depreciation in quality of life, surgery or a wide variety of other harms can begin the process of receiving what they deserve in a court of law. If you have received one of these implants, and experienced problems relating to the DePuy ASR hip implant, contact the Berniard Law Firm.

Symptoms of DePuy ASR Hip Implant Failure and How to Know if You Might Have a Problem

Published on: September 25, 2010 | By Berniard Law Firm

Depuy ASR hip replacements, part of the Johnson & Johnson’s implant division, has recently been recalled due to problems with its placement during surgeries and general issues relating to the product. Along with metal shavings slowly being cast into the soft tissue of patients, the following are problems patients have noted as experiencing as a result of the implant and procedure:

Pain in the Hip Region

Problems While or Inability to Walk

Product Defect and Negligence Central to Claims Against DePuy for Faulty Hip Implant

Published on: September 24, 2010 | By Berniard Law Firm

Johnson and Johnson’s orthopedic division, DePuy Orthopedics, Inc., has issued a recall for two of their hip implant products, the ASR XL Acetabular System and the DePuy ASR Hip Resurfacing System. An estimated 93,000 individual’s received this implant surgery before the recall, and this has prompted many indvidual’s to file lawsuits against Johnson and Johnson as well as DePuy.

Specifically, a lawsuit was recently filed against DePuy and Johnson and Johnson for strict liability. The plaintiffs say that DePuy and Johnson and Johnson caused to be manufactured, marketed, and distributed the DePuy ASR Hip System, which has been recently recalled due to serious problems with the product’s safety. In particular, DePuy released data indicating that a greater number of patients than expected required revision surgery. DePuy’s report shows that five years after the hip implant surgery, approximately 1 in 8 individuals who received the ASR resurfacing device and 1 in 8 who had received the ASR total hip replacement, needed revision surgery. This second corrective surgery is necessary in many cases to completely remove the DePuy ASR Hip System and replace it with a different implant. This is deeply troubling, having hip replacement surgery is already a traumatic event, but having to undergo a second surgery only complicates and endangers individual’s health.

Further, plaintiff’s are claiming that the corrective surgery is necessary due to the defects of DePuy’s metal on metal hip implants. Medical problems associated with the DePuy ASR Hip System include the component device loosening, component malalignment, fracture, and dislocation. Due to these product design defects, plaintiff’s claim pain, swelling, and difficulty in walking for years after the DePuy ASR Hip System is implanted. But the implant also causes a condition called metallosis. Metallosis is a failure of the device and, in essence, occurs when the metallic ball and socket components of the DePuy ASR Hip System rub together and metal shavings are deposited in the socket and surrounding tissue. The recall notice acknowledges the issue of metallosis, recognizing that it can cause soft tissue damage that may complicate the results of the revision surgery. The plaintiff’s claim that everyday activities pose a significant challenge and pain discomfort are experienced regularly as a result of the DePuy hip implant. These issues are likely to be common for many people across the country who have received the implant as, again, the company’s own reports cite 13% failure rate and this is, most likely, a low count compared to the incidences that go unreported or unrecorded.

Also, the DePuy ASR Hip System is alleged to be defective and thus, unreasonably dangerous for ordinary use. This is important given the fact DePuy may have been aware of the problem and yet manufactured, distributed, and sold the product worldwide. Plaintiff’s further contend that the product was so dangerous that a reasonable consumer would not have contemplated receiving the implant had the dangers been known. However, again, the dangers of the product were not disclosed by DePuy, even though they have received product complaints dating back to 2005. Furthermore, the product lacked any adequate warnings or even instructions and left consumers at a complete disadvantage in dealing with their physical safety. It is important to note that DePuy, as a manufacturer, had a duty to the plaintiff/consumer to manufacture, distribute, and/or sell a reasonably safe product that would be fit for consumers, and this duty was breached by manufacturing and selling a product that resulted in thousands of individual’s experiencing pain and discomfort on a daily basis.

Financial compensation for those who have been effected by the DePuy recalled products is available. Legal representation can and will help to protect and enforce individual’s legal rights. If you have experienced pain and suffering or have had to have revision surgery after receiving one of the two recalled DePuy products, contact the Berniard Law Firm.

Outrage Building Over DePuy ASR Hip Implant Recall – How Long Did Company Know of Problems?

Published on: September 22, 2010 | By Berniard Law Firm

Johnson and Johnson’s orthopedic division, DePuy Orthopedics, Inc., has issued a recall for two of their hip implant products, the ASR XL Acetabular System and the DePuy ASR Hip Resurfacing System. The recall was triggered by the exceptionally high number of individuals experiencing severe pain and discomfort after having the hip implant surgery. In fact, DePuy released a report that shows that five years after the hip implant surgery, approximately 1 in 8 individuals who received the ASR resurfacing device and 1 in 8 who had received the ASR total hip replacement, needed a second surgery called a revision surgery in order to correct the first implantation.

This is, of course, a disturbing report. Having hip replacement surgery is traumatic to begin with, but to require a second surgery to correct a problem that should not have existed, only further endangers the individual’s health and makes the healing process more difficult. To date, over 93,000 individuals have undergone hip replacement surgery and received one of the two recalled DePuy products.

Moreover, the recalled products have resulted in serious physical issues. Some of the physical issues the products have caused include the product itself wearing out after five years and leading to fractures of the artificial hip, loosening of the device itself causing bones breaking around the hip socket area, and swelling and difficulty walking. The recalled products have resulted in thousands of individual’s experiencing pain on a daily basis, these two products were supposed to help individuals, not hurt them.

Significantly, the DePuy ASR Hip resurfacing System was not approved for use inside the United States, and thus, did not go through the necessary testing and treatments to ensure that the hip implant was safe for individuals to receive. Questions surround whether or not Johnson and Johnson knew about the dangers of the two hip implant products years before they recently recalled them. In fact, these two products have had complaints dating back to 2005 from Canadians, Americans, British, and Welsh. Further, this is not the first product that Johnson and Johnson has had recalled in recent months, these two hip implants products will be the 11th recall for the company in the past 11 months.

It took Johnson and Johnson five years to recall the hip implants, even though they had a report stating the high number of people who were experiencing severe pain and discomfort, not to mention the need for a second corrective surgery. For a wide variety of issues relating to this unfortunate matter, financial compensation for those who have been effected by these two recalled products is available. Legal representation can and will help to protect and enforce individual’s legal rights.

If you have experienced pain and suffering or even have had to undergo a second corrective surgery after receiving one of the two recalled DePuy products, contact the Berniard Law Firm. Providing the best advice and guidance our law firm is fully capable of meeting your litigation needs.

DePuy ASR Hip Replacement Implant Lawsuits Begin Due to Faulty Product

Published on: September 14, 2010 | By Berniard Law Firm

Individuals who have entrusted the DePuy company with their physical well being after requiring hip replacements are finding significant problems with their prosthetic. Though implants like this often last more than a decade, at times as long as 15 or more years, the ASR hip implant cup has seen failure after only a couple years after being installed. DePuy Orthopedics, a division of Johnson & Johnson, has begun notifying doctors of the implants failure and is drawing attention now for how the hip implant can be falling so significantly short of the advertised longevity.

Operating as a metal on metal replacement in the event an individual requires a hip implant, the ASR cup requires a significant amount of skill and care in its installation. Should the implant not be installed properly, or the bone does not properly fit into the implant, significant wear and tear can develop that leads to implant failure. When this device fails, a surgical fix is required that can be extremely painful for the recipient. What’s more, as there is inherent danger involved in any surgical procedure, and hip replacements are often carried out for the elderly, this is an unacceptable development for the product.

Product defect suits can often be difficult because there are a wide variety of factors. One issue that will come into question in legal action against DePuy will be how long the company was aware that the implant had a high failure rate. Should it be provable that DePuy was slow to take action about notifying doctors, and subsequently their patients, about problems related to the ASR hip replacement, real responsibility consequences will be issued against the division of Johnson & Johnson that will mean monetary damages paid out to patients.