Hi, this is Stuart Talley of Kershaw, Cook & Talley, P.C. . I am the partner responsible for the Stryker Rejuvenate and ABG II litigation. The reason I am doing this video today is to provide some breaking news in the status of the Stryker Rejuvenate and ABG II litigation.
I just returned from court here in Minneapolis, Minnesota, and I am pleased to announce that at a court hearing that was held today, a global settlement agreement was announced. This is a settlement that will be open to anyone who has a Stryker Rejuvenate or ABG II hip that has been revised. Under the terms of the settlement, anyone who has a Stryker Rejuvenate or ABG II hip that has been revised will receive on average $300,000. This settlement can go up or down depending on individual circumstances of the plaintiff. The settlement can go up if someone has extraordinary injuries, or injuries that go beyond an average case. For example, somebody who either has an infection after revision, dislocation, or needed an osteotomy, there are upward adjustments for those types of injuries.
This settlement puts in place a mechanism so that anyone with one of these hips receives some sort of compensation. It is important to know this is a completely voluntary settlement program. The settlement in place is really a settlement offer that’s made available to anyone who has these hips. The settlement may not be perfect for everybody. I don’t think this settlement works for many cases within our firm. Those cases may have to be litigated going forward.
If you have a Stryker Rejuvenate or ABG II that was revised, it is very important you immediately get in touch with an attorney so they can evaluate your case, help process you through this settlement program, and get you the compensation that you deserve.
If you have a Stryker Rejuvenate or ABG II that was not revised, the settlement agreement provides relief for those people as well in the form of non-monetary relief. Stryker takes the position that unless you’ve been revised, you have not suffered damages. I know lots of people are concerned about elevated cobalt and chromium. But the science right now is pretty clear that unless you actually have some kind of soft tissue injury in the hips, it’s very difficult to prove one of these cases. So, Stryker is not paying people that have not had a revision.
What is important to know about the settlement is that if you have a case that is on file, and your hip has not been revised, the statute of limitations will be tolled in your case. This means that your case doesn’t run. You’re protected if you need a revision down the road, and you could participate in the settlement at that point or file a lawsuit, or do what you need to do to preserve and protect your rights.
However, if you have a Stryker Rejuvenate or ABG II, that has not been revised and you do not have a case on file, you are not protected. Stryker has made it clear in the settlement that they intend to pursue the statute of limitations as a defense in cases. They may do that if you wait too long to get a case on file. But if you get a case on file now, the settlement agreement essentially tolls your statute, and keeps it preserved and protects your rights down the road.
Many individuals implanted with recalled Stryker Rejuvenate or ABG II metal on metal hips are dealing with Broadspire, a third party claims Administration Company. Stryker hired Broadspire in order to process hip reimbursement claims from patients with recalled Rejuvenate or ABG II hips. Attorneys at Kershaw, Cook & Talley, P.C. recently launched a Broadspire Resource Center, highlighting information on how to communicate with Broadspire and suggestions for patients’ legal and medical next course of action. Stryker Orthopedics, a Howmedica Osteonics Corporation, initiated a recall of approximately 25,000 Stryker Rejuvenate and ABG II hips in June 2012. The recall was precipitated as a result of numerous reports detailing the possibility of adverse local tissue reactions (ALTR) secondary to fretting and corrosion from the metal on metal hips. Patients suffering side effects from the hips are likely to undergo costly surgeries and revisions as well as subsequent follow up care. As a result, Broadspire provides certain reimbursement to patients who may incur out of pocket expenses from their recalled hip.
Stryker Orthopedics, a Howmedica Osteonics Corporation, initiated a recall of approximately 25,000 Stryker Rejuvenate and ABG II hips in June 2012. The recall was precipitated as a result of numerous reports detailing the possibility of adverse local tissue reactions (ALTR) secondary to fretting and corrosion from the metal on metal hips. Patients suffering side effects from the hips are likely to undergo costly surgeries and revisions as well as subsequent follow up care. As a result, Broadspire provides certain reimbursement to patients who may incur out of pocket expenses from their recalled hip.
Kershaw, Cook & Talley, P.C. created the new Broadspire Resource Center, which exclusively provides information regarding Broadspire. Bill Kershaw and Stuart Talley, partners at Kershaw, Cook & Talley, P.C. , are concerned with the misinformation clients and individuals may have regarding Broadspire. According to Mr. Talley, “Many people do not know that Broadspire works for Stryker and not for the individuals, and that any information you share with Broadspire could be used against you in later proceedings.”
The resource center serves as a venue where individuals can obtain the necessary information via videos and content about the legal issues and risks of dealing with Broadspire. Such information includes the details of what Broadspire will and will not cover as well as commonly asked questions and respective answers. Mr. Talley states, “These new resource centers provide easy access to information that may otherwise be difficult to ascertain, our recommendations on how to deal with Broadspire, and why there is an essential need to hire an attorney to protect your rights.”
Mr. Talley’s most recent video, “Broadspire Called: Should I Hire a Lawyer?” details present client experiences with Broadspire and discusses the importance of retaining an attorney. Kershaw, Cook & Talley, P.C. has a specific team who helps submit claims to Broadspire on behalf of hundreds of their clients, and process their claims expeditiously. Clients are also provided a team representative who is available by phone and email if they have questions about the Broadspire process. In addition, attorneys at Kershaw, Cook & Talley, P.C. provide this service at no cost to the client.
Kershaw, Cook & Talley, P.C. is a Sacramento-based firm representing individuals nationwide in defective medical device cases. The firm generates hundreds of millions of dollars in recoveries for their clients and the classes they represent. Individuals impacted by Stryker’s hip systems are entitled to compensation for wage losses, medical bills, and pain and suffering. For a free case evaluation, and more information about the status of the case, feel free to call Bill Kershaw or Stuart Talley directly at 888-635-3970.
*United States District Court District of Minnesota (MDL No. 13-2441)
July 7, 2014
Attorneys at Kershaw, Cook & Talley, P.C. are actively involved in the ongoing Stryker Rejuvenate and ABGII Hip Implant Products Liability litigation (Case No. 13-MD-2441) now pending in the United States District Court for the District of Minnesota. These cases are among more than 2,000 Stryker Rejuvenate and ABG II cases occurring throughout the country. Kershaw, Cook & Talley, P.C. recently launched a litigation update page in order to better advise their clients. The page contains a series of videos from partner, Stuart Talley, concerning the status of the litigation.
In the most recent video, Mr. Talley provides a description of what occurred during the court’s June status conference in Minneapolis. According to Mr. Talley, there are conflicting agendas between the parties. During the status conference, plaintiffs discussed how Stryker was still refusing to produce documents and failed to produce witnesses for deposition. These issues will most likely resolve through a series of motions to compel.
In Mr. Talley’s most recent video update, he provides a more detailed description of these discovery disputes along with his opinions on how the litigation is progressing and what is expected for the future.
Kershaw, Cook & Talley, P.C. is a Sacramento-based firm representing individuals nationwide in defective medical device cases. The firm generates hundreds of millions of dollars in recoveries for their clients and the classes they represent. Individuals impacted by Stryker’s hip systems are entitled to compensation for wage losses, medical bills, and pain and suffering. For a free case evaluation, and more information about the status of the case, feel free to call Bill Kershaw or Stuart Talley directly at 888-635-3970 or visit http://www.cobalt-chromium-toxicity.com.
MDL 13-2441: Transcript of Status Conference, June 12, 2014
On June 29, 2012, Stryker announced the recall of more than 20,000 Rejuvenate and ABG II hips implanted in patients throughout the United States. These hips are alleged to have a very high failure rate. However, to date, only a small fraction of those with recalled hips filed lawsuits. Attorneys at Kershaw, Cook & Talley, P.C. are concerned individuals with affected hips may lose their opportunity to recover damages if they fail to file a claim before June 29, 2014.
In most states, the statute of limitations, or time in which you can file a lawsuit, is approximately two years. Stryker could possibly argue this statute of limitations began to run on June 29, 2012; the date it first announced a recall of its Rejuvenate and ABGII hips. Therefore, many victims will need to file their lawsuits before June 29, 2014.
Kershaw, Cook & Talley, P.C. partner, Stuart Talley, reports: “Over the past few days, many people are calling in. People are very concerned about the statute of limitations and want us to file their cases prior to the June 29 deadline.”
According to Mr. Talley, the date the statute of limitations begins to run is not always set in stone. Stryker may argue it ran on the date it announced the recall even if the plaintiff was unaware of the recall. Furthermore, Stryker might claim the deadline begins to run whether or not an individual underwent revision surgery or experiences any issues with their hip.
Specifically, Mr. Talley notes: “People are unaware that if your hip is not hurting, or your doctor has not recommended surgery, the statute of limitations could arguably be running on your case. It may be too late to bring a claim if you wait until your doctor says you need surgery. In order have protection down the road, it is critical to contact an attorney immediately.”
The attorneys at Kershaw, Cook & Talley, P.C. set up a statute of limitations information page which provides extensive information to victims. On this page, Stuart Talley provides detailed information via video concerning the statute of limitations and how Stryker Rejuvenate recipients should proceed to protect their interests. This website is just one of many Kershaw, Cook & Talley, P.C. created in order to provide information for people impacted as a result of the Rejuvenate recall. The most popular sections of the Cobalt Chromium Toxicity Website include pages regarding cobalt and chromium toxicity, a medical research library, a reference page for Rejuvenate victims, and monthly updates on the Stryker rejuvenate litigation.
Kershaw, Cook & Talley, P.C. is a Sacramento-based firm representing individuals nationwide in defective medical device cases. The firm generates hundreds of millions of dollars in recoveries for their clients and the classes they represent. Individuals impacted by Stryker’s hip systems are entitled to compensation for wage losses, medical bills, and pain and suffering. For a free case evaluation, and more information about the status of the case, feel free to call Bill Kershaw or Stuart Talley directly at 888-635-3970 or log onto http://www.cobalt-chromium-toxicity.com
Kershaw, Cook & Talley, P.C. represents hundreds of individuals dealing with the physical and emotional toll from their defective hips. The partners at the firm are dedicated to providing the latest information concerning Stryker Rejuvenate and Stryker ABG II prostheses.
Many of our clients receive different opinions, and treatment options, regarding follow-up for their defective metal on metal hips. Some clients were informed revision surgery was a necessary solution, while others were told monitoring via repeat blood tests, x-rays, and physical examination was sufficient.
Kershaw, Cook & Talley, P.C. attorneys compiled a list of questions every Stryker patient should ask their surgeon regarding the best course of action. The list serves as a guide to ensure your clinician takes the appropriate steps necessary for your treatment and protection.
For the comprehensive list, please refer to Questions To Ask Your Doctor.
The partners at Kershaw, Cook & Talley, P.C. created a website informing clients on the latest developments in the Stryker Rejuvenate hip implant litigation. The website contains a series of videos where Stuart Talley, a partner, provides clients with status updates on theStryker Rejuvenate litigation. Presently, there are over a thousand Stryker cases pending throughout the country. A Minneapolis Federal District Court judge manages a majority of these cases. Mr. Talley is also a member of the Plaintiff’s Steering Committee. He attends monthly case management hearings concerning the litigation, and subsequently records videos providing updates on the hearings.
According to Mr. Talley, “The Minneapolis litigation is advancing. The judge recently provided trial dates for the first bellwether cases, and discovery is progressing at full speed. The judge holds status conferences every month which resolve numerous disputes arising in the case. The litigation update page provides real-time reports relaying how the judge deals with these disputes and keeps our clients up to date on the case status.”
Currently, the page contains approximately seven updates from the start of the litigation to the present status. In the latest update, Mr. Talley provides commentary regarding the status of electronic discovery, the selecting process for bellwether cases, and scheduling of the litigation.
Mr. Talley states, “A common concern from clients focuses on the status of their case. This is problematic since lawyers often have hundreds or thousands of individual clients in large and complex cases. The video updates alleviate these concerns because clients may view how their case progresses each month. This is more informative than a standard form letter.”
Recently there have been reports that Stryker, through Broadspire Services, Inc., is attempting to obtain releases from unrepresented individuals allegedly injured by the Stryker Rejuvenate and ABG II hip systems in an effort to settle their cases. This is a stark departure from Broadspire’s previous practice of paying individuals for their “out-of-pocket” expenses, without requiring a release of any claims. This recent tactic is disturbing to many plaintiff’s lawyers since many unrepresented individuals may not fully understand the legal ramifications of their actions or the numerous pit falls that can occur if a settlement is not done correctly. Civil Justice Attorneys at Kershaw, Cook & Talley, P.C. are urging patients not to sign any document from Broadspire without first consulting with an attorney.
One of the biggest concerns, according to legal experts, is that the amounts being offered by Broadspire and Stryker are well below what would be considered fair compensation. Product liability attorney, Stuart Talley warns, “We have received several calls from unrepresented individuals who were seeking advice about settlement offers being made by Broadspire. When I heard the amounts being offered, I was shocked. Given the kind of pain and suffering experienced during a Stryker revision surgery, they are essentially offering pennies on the dollar.” Talley also cautions that the settlement process can be extremely complicated and that, without a lawyer, irreversible errors could be made that may result in a patient receiving nothing or much less than they expect.
There is a long list of potential pitfalls consumers may not be aware of. Here is one critical risk factor. Hip replacement patients need to know that MediCare and private health insurance companies hold liens on their litigation. What this means is that the insurance carrier, by law, is entitled to be reimbursed from any settlement paid to a patient for the entire cost of the revision surgery and subsequent treatment. In some cases, these liens can exceed $100,000. If the liens are not paid at the time of settlement, the hip patient could end up being personally liable for the entire cost of the replacement surgery. This could come as a huge blow to most plaintiffs and could end up dramatically reducing or completely eliminating a patient’s settlement award.
Here’s an example. If a patient settles their case with Stryker for $225,000 and it turns out that MediCare paid $300,000 to cover the patient’s revision surgery, as well as subsequent treatments, the hip patient could be personally liable to MediCare for the entire $225,000. This means that the settlement recipient would end up receiving nothing from the settlement.
Talley further cautions hip patients on another critical factor. Any settlement deal with Broadspire will be final and will eliminate any rights to file a claim should hip problems present themselves in the future. “In order to settle your case, Stryker will insist that you sign a ‘release.’ A ‘release’ is a formal legal document where you agree to give up all of your rights to sue Stryker for any issues related to your failed hip.” This is important to understand especially if a hip patient has recently had revision surgery. Affected hip recipients do not want to settle their case until they’re confident their hip has fully recovered from surgery. For example, one unrepresented patient contacted Talley to seek advice on a potential settlement offer from Stryker. However, the patient had just had her revision surgery 2 months previously and was still recovering from that surgery. “There are a significant number of unfortunate circumstances that can occur after revision surgery and sometimes these challenges don’t present themselves until months later. We’ve seen patients suffering from infections, nerve damage, or bone fractures that in some cases occurred up to a year after surgery. If you sign a release too early and problems arise down the road, you will not be able to obtain any additional compensation from Stryker. You are essentially on your own.”
Now trial watchers may recall that Johnson & Johnson’s DePuy Orthopaedics Inc. unit hired Broadspire to manage the company’s mounting claims and out-of-pocket expenses associated with alleged defective hip cases in 2011. According to an August, 2011 Reuters report, industry critics and legal experts argued that the strategy was designed to limit settlement payments, while gaining access to medical records and other private data that could be used against patients in court. Johnson & Johnson maintained that it was an efficient way to process thousands of claims.
Stryker followed suit in partnering with Broadspire after its Rejuvenate and ABG II hip replacement systems were recalled in July of 2013. FDA reports indicated that the devices were prone to fretting and corrosion, causing metal toxicity in some patients. More than 20,000 prosthetic Stryker Rejuvenate and ABG II hips were surgically implanted into patients nationwide between 2008 and 2012. Both models are reporting alarmingly high failure rates.
As attorneys representing patients allegedly injured by Stryker Rejuvenate and Stryker ABG II hip systems build their case against the manufacturer of these hips, the number of filings continues to rise in the United States according to the latest look inside court records. Court documents issued on January 17, 2014, reveal more than 1,200 Stryker hip lawsuits have now been filed on behalf of individuals who allegedly suffered serious complications from Stryker’s Rejuvenate and ABG II hip stems. There are approximately 529 cases filed in or on their way to federal multidistrict litigation. The majority of the federal cases have been consolidated into a single proceeding in Minneapolis, Minnesota before Judge Donovan Frank. (In Re Stryker Rejuvenate Hip Stem and the ABG II Hip Stem Litigation, MDL No. 13-2441, Dkt. 158.) Additionally, 597 state cases have been filed in the New Jersey coordinated proceedings, 56 cases filed in Florida, and approximately 20 additional cases filed in California, Georgia, Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, and West Virginia.
In what is a unique development, attorneys at Kershaw, Cook & Talley, P.C. have created a new way to keep clients informed on the status of the proceedings by creating a litigation update website that contains video commentary by Kershaw, Cook & Talley, P.C. partner, Stuart Talley. The Stryker Hip Recall Litigation Update page is part of the Defective Hip Settlement Center website that is fielding questions and offering legal advice to affected hip patients across the country. “We talk to hip patients daily who want to know about issues like statutes of limitations and the overall status of the case. Instead of writing long, boring status letters to our clients we have decided to post monthly videos where we describe what is happening with the litigation in real-time,” says Talley.
Talley, who is a member of the Stryker Rejuvenate Plaintiff’s Steering Committee, attends status conferences that the court holds each month and following these conferences, posts videos about what occurred in court that day. “Unfortunately, the court proceedings before Judge Frank are not televised or recorded and many clients simply are not in a position to travel to Minneapolis and sit in on the hearings. So, what we are doing is bringing the courtroom to our clients. It’s sort of like a personalized Court TV for the people we represent.”
The video update for the January 2013 Plaintiff’s Steering Committee meeting covered the legal debate over Stryker’s request to interview the surgeons of patients with alleged failed hip devices, as well as a handful of cases that have gone through full mediation, which may ultimately point to a future global settlement in the case. The next Plaintiffs’ Steering Committee meeting is slated for February 20, 2014 in Minneapolis. For the entire legal update and transcript, log onto https://www.defectivehipsettlementcenter.com and click on Stryker Litigation Updates on the menu bar.
The recall of Stryker Rejuvenate and ABG II modular systems includes more than 20,000 prosthetic hips surgically implanted into patients nationwide between 2008 and 2012, according to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration.The suit alleges the device manufacturer put a failed device on the market that caused metal poisoning and in some cases led to painful revision surgeries for thousands of patients.
If you, or someone you know, was affected by the Stryker Rejuvenate hip implant, you are potentially entitled to compensation for your medical expenses, lost wages, and pain and suffering. Fill out the contact form on this page or call our hip replacement lawyers toll-free at 888-635-3970 for a confidential case evaluation.
For more information on the Stryker Rejuvenate recall, click on the links below.
For more information on this topic, visit the DePuy Hip Replacement Recall Legal Resource Center. For more information on cobalt and chromium toxicity, visit our new website www.cobalt-chromium-toxicity.com that features in-depth interviews with world-renowned metal toxicologist, Dr. Michael McCabe.