Zimmer Hip Mediation Moves Forward
The Zimmer Hip MDL ruling has fueled the discussion regarding potential Zimmer hip settlements. Individuals are consulting Zimmer hip lawyers in increasing numbers to aid them in determining their lawsuit eligibility.
Zimmer hip lawsuit mediation scheduled in New Jersey
The Zimmer Durom Cup product liability MDL is pending in the US District Court in Newark, New Jersey. In December of 2010, the Court ordered that the cases proceed to mediation. Zimmer responded with assurances that they were ready to settle with plaintiffs for what they referred to as a “fair value.” Their “fair value” settlement offers will be based on considerations of lost wages, medical bills, and revision/replacement surgery requirements due to the failed Zimmer hips. Plaintiffs will meet with Zimmer representatives to discuss their specific situations at certain locations throughout the US. Mediation started in San Francisco, California.
Individuals involved with Zimmer Hip lawsuits are generally pleased with the decision to consolidate the cases for Multidistrict Litigation as bringing the Zimmer hip replacement lawsuits before one judge as a group eliminates duplicative discovery, eliminates the potential for contradictory rulings and is far more convenient for all involved (the Court, witnesses and parties, etc.) If multidistrict litigation does not result in settlement or other satisfactory resolution during pretrial litigation, lawsuits are returned to the jurisdiction in which they were originally filed for trial.
Zimmer hip lawsuit numbers increase
The Zimmer Durom Cup was first marketed in the US in 2006. Since that time, over 12,000 patients have received Zimmer hip devices in Total Hip Arthroplasty (THA) surgeries and hip resurfacings. Due to the number of people who received these devices, the continuously increasing number of plaintiffs in the Zimmer Hip MDL is not surprising to experts in the industry.
The metal on metal technology used in the design of the Zimmer Durom Cup Hip device was intended to provide high levels of joint stability while simultaneously removing as little bone as possible. It was seen as specifically beneficial for younger and more active patients. One of the main benefits cited to patients considering the hip implants was greater range of motion, allowing patients to return to active and healthy lifestyles once recovered. It quickly became apparent due to the failure rate of the device that many Zimmer hip patients would not be returning to their healthy, active lifestyles so quickly.
Failure of the device typically becomes obvious 90 days or more after surgery and usually causes one or more of the following to occur:
Zimmer Hip Implant Failure
- Pain or discomfort in the replacement joint
- Loosening of the implant or popping in the replacement joint
- Revision surgery
Individuals who received a Zimmer Durom Cup hip replacement or hip resurfacing may be eligible to file a Zimmer Hip lawsuit if they have experienced or are experiencing any of the complications listed above. Those who consult a legal professional often have many questions. But once eligibility is determined, the most common question is the potential for Zimmer hip settlements.
When attempting to calculate the award of a potential Zimmer hip lawsuit settlement, it is important to understand that while your Zimmer hip lawyer access past cases and precedents and details of current litigation, the specific details of each Zimmer hip lawsuit will be taken into consideration when the potential settlement amount is being determined. The jury and defendant will consider specific details when making a determination.
Factors influencing Zimmer Hip Settlements
- Extent of hip complications
- Medical expenses (past and future)
- Emotional distress related to Zimmer hip problems
- Lost earnings and loss of potential future earnings
- Negative impact on career
- Pain and suffering
- Other out of pocket expenses
The unique circumstances of your situation will define your Zimmer hip lawsuit and will ultimately lead to the determination of any settlement amount. This process is highly specific to each individual, making it difficult to provide plaintiffs with approximate settlement amounts prior to the conclusion of the litigation.