Zimmer Hip Lawyer Claims Client’s Injuries Result of Defective Device
A complaint was recently filed by a Zimmer hip lawyer in the Superior Court of Los Angeles County. The lawsuit was filed in California on August 28, 2012, by a plaintiff who claims his injuries after hip replacement surgery were due to a faulty implant device. The plaintiff also asserts that Zimmer failed to warn the general public or the medical community about the risks associated with the device. The company has never chosen to issue a Zimmer hip replacement recall, even though numerous patient claims have already been settled by the hip manufacturer.
Durom Cup subject of Zimmer hip implant lawsuit
In this Zimmer hip implant lawsuit, the plaintiff states that he was implanted with the Zimmer Metasul Durom Acetabular Component. This Zimmer model features a metal-on-metal construction that has been advertised by the company as a preferred option for younger hip implant patients. The metal design was touted for its durability, allowing younger patients to go much longer on their first hip implant without requiring subsequent surgeries to replace a worn device.
Zimmer hip replacement recall?
However, some patients who received the Zimmer implant found that early hip failure caused them to require revision surgery much sooner than expected, with some patients requiring a replacement hip within just a few years after the original procedure. Doctors also began reporting high failure rates with the devices; a fact that prompted Zimmer to halt sales of the device in 2008.
The hip implant was returned to the market just one month later, with the company citing physician error, rather than a manufacturing defect, as the reason for the unusually high failure rate.
Zimmer hip lawyer alleges plaintiff’s ongoing pain
In this Zimmer hip implant lawsuit, the plaintiff claims his device failed shortly after it was installed, causing him pain and extreme weakness in his treated hip. The plaintiff alleges he will continue to suffer “pain and suffering, disability, disfigurement,” and economic loss due to continuous medical bills, pharmaceutical costs and lost wages.
The plaintiff’s injuries are a direct result of Zimmer’s failure to notify the general public and the medical community of the risks associated with the device, or to issue a Zimmer hip replacement recall, according to the complaint.
The plaintiff, through his Zimmer hip lawyer, names specific representatives of Zimmer as defendants on the complaint, as well as Zimmer Inc. and Xcel Medical. According to the lawsuit, these individuals were responsible for distributing the Durom Cup and providing physicians with surgical instructions. The plaintiff seeks general, punitive and exemplary damages, in an amount to be determined at the time of trial.