Expert Witness Slipup Sends First Bard Transvaginal Mesh Trial Packing

On Monday, July 8, the first of more than 20,000 pending cases against vaginal mesh makers went to trial against C. R. Bard. Bard is facing allegations that its product, intended for use in treating stress incontinence and pelvic prolapse, was defective and caused injuries in thousands of women. Other manufacturers of similar products are also facing nationwide lawsuits making similar claims.

Women who have been injured, suffered pain, or even required surgery, will receive renewed chances to seek justice against companies which they allege allowed a defective product on the market.

In Monday’s case, filed by plaintiff Donna Carson, the result wasn’t what anyone had expected. An expert gynecological witness speaking on behalf of the plaintiffs had been told already that the subject of Bard’s marketing practices was off limits – but, after mentioning the company’s withdrawal of Avaulta vaginal mesh from the market in 2012, seems to have done just that. The mention prompted Bard’s lawyers to push for a mistrial, and Judge Joseph Goodwin agreed. The trial had been set to run for twelve days. The case was declared a mistrial by the U.S. District Court of West Virginia after only two.

Not good for Donna Carson, but not necessarily bad news for other women injured by vaginal mesh products. The fact is that the mistrial ruling has very little to do with the merits of the case or the likelihood that plaintiffs will be able to seek compensation. Instead, it’s a slight oversight on the witness’s behalf and, effectively, the mistrial resulted from a technicality more than a ruling. In future cases brought to trial against C. R. Bard and other manufacturers of transvaginal mesh, women who have been injured, suffered pain, or even required surgery, will receive renewed chances to seek justice against companies which they allege allowed a defective product on the market.

For C. R. Bard, it’s a hollow victory. The company faces more than 3,600 claims over the Avaulta mesh and the legal battle to determine whether they can be held liable for damages has only just begun.