Zimmer Hip Replacement Lawsuit

zimmer hip replacement lawsuit

Zimmer Holdings is the manufacturer of the Durom Cup hip replacement device. The Durom Cup hip replacement device was supposed to provide surgeons and patients with a wider variety of hip implant options while maintaining durability. However, Zimmer lawsuits were filed due to the numerous instances in which patients experienced problems with their Durom Cup replacements.

The Zimmer Durom Cup hip device was prone to loosening, causing hip dislocation in patients. In numerous cases, faulty Zimmer Durom Cup hip replacement devices required hip revision surgery after the first hip replacement surgery. For some patients, second hip revision surgeries were required as well. This lead to patients filing Zimmer hip replacement lawsuits to gain financial compensation for medical expenses, lost wages, caregiver expenses, loss of consortium, punitive damages, and pain and suffering.

Durom Cup Whistleblower

In 2007, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) was first alerted to problems with the Zimmer Durom Cup hip device by a previous Zimmer hip consultant. Dr. Larry Dorr, M.D., expressed serious concerns regarding a high failure rate in the Zimmer Durom Cup hip replacement device. As more orthopedic surgeons reported cases of Zimmer Durom Cup hip failure, Zimmer Holdings denied Dorr’s claims.

After further investigation, it was discovered that the Zimmer Durom Cup hip replacement device failed more than Zimmer Holdings had initially claimed. Zimmer insisted that the durability and effectiveness of the Zimmer Durom Cup depended entirely on whether the proper hip replacement surgery technique was used. However, the Zimmer Durom Cup failure rate was as high as 5.7 percent. This led to the voluntary Zimmer Durom Cup recall in July 2008. The Zimmer Durom Cup recall lasted until August of 2008.

Zimmer hip lawsuit case review

Zimmer Hip Lawsuits

By 2011, Zimmer Durom Cup hip replacement recipients filed hip replacement lawsuits against Zimmer Holdings. Plaintiffs, such as Barry L. Grossman, cite claims such as significant injury, pain and suffering, and a lesser quality of life. Grossman stated that he no longer had mobility or independence to do activities that he enjoyed. In addition, Grossman cited a leading surgeon claiming that the Zimmer Durom Cup hip replacement failure rate could be as high as 24 percent.

Zimmer Reacts to Hip Replacement Lawsuits

As patients began to file Zimmer hip replacement lawsuit claims, Zimmer was strictly accepting hip replacement lawsuit claims for hip replacement surgeries that occurred prior to July 22, 2008. Zimmer’s restrictions expanded to only include patients that received Zimmer hip revision surgery within the first two years after the original hip replacement surgery. After some time, Zimmer Holdings was forced to accept all Zimmer hip replacement lawsuit claims for patients that required hip revision surgery beyond the two-year mark.

Zimmer Holdings set aside roughly $271.7 million to settle Zimmer hip replacement lawsuits. The company planned to pay all Zimmer hip replacement lawsuit settlements within three years. However, since then, Zimmer has acknowledged that Zimmer hip replacement lawsuit costs may be larger than the company originally anticipated.

Zimmer Swiss Document Debate

During Zimmer hip replacement lawsuit Multi District Litigation (MDL) proceedings, a document was discovered that is related to the plaintiffs’ claims. The document was in possession by Zimmer’s Swiss affiliate, Zimmer GmbH. The defendants attempted to prevent the Swiss document’s inclusion into Zimmer hip replacement lawsuit evidence during MDL litigation, citing the Hague Convention Rules. The Hague Convention Rules addressed many issues involve war conduct, but they also address the settlement of international disputes and limit forced recovery of contract debts.

In February 2013, Magistrate Judge Madeline Cox Arleo denied Zimmer’s request to prevent their Swiss affiliate’s document from entering Zimmer hip replacement MDL evidence. Furthermore, Judge Arleo ordered Zimmer GmbH, the Swiss affiliate, to join Zimmer Holdings as defendants in the Zimmer hip replacement lawsuit cases. This MDL action was extended to state courts holding Zimmer hip replacement lawsuit proceedings in April 2013.

Show Sources
  1. "Durom MDL Court Denies Zimmer’s Bid for Hague Convention Rules in Swiss Discovery." Harris Martin Publishing. (2013): n. page. Print. http://harrismartin.com/article/15717/
  2. In re: Zimmer Durom Hip Cup Products Liability Litigation, MDL No. 21582013. Print. http://harrismartin.com/media/uploads/documents/HIP-1305-14.pdf
  3. "Plaintiffs’ Counsel in Zimmer Durom Hip MDL Update State Court Colleagues on Discovery Issues." Harris Martin Publishing. (2013): n. page. Print. http://harrismartin.com/article/16109/
  4. "Wis. Plaintiff Sues Over Alleged Defects in Zimmer's Durom Cup Hip Implant." Harris Martin Publishing. (2011): n. page. Print. http://harrismartin.com/article/13760/