Since its release as a contraceptive device on the US market, thousands of women have suffered complications from the insertion of the Mirena Intra Uterine Device. (IUD) These complications include apparent perforation of the uterus and other organs from the migration of the device as well as the development of a rare brain disease that can lead to painful headaches and even loss of vision, called pseudotumor cerebri. Litigation has commenced to compensate victims in all 50 states.
With the large number of lawsuits, it is widely perceived that these suits are part of a large class action lawsuit, but to the contrary, a Mirena class action lawsuit has not yet been established. At this time each suit has been filed individually at various state and federal levels. Coordination of these suits through the motions of both the defendant, Bayer Healthcare, and the plaintiffs have been filed in both state and federal courts in the U.S.
Bayer filed a request in August of 2012 seeking that all pending lawsuits in New Jersey state courts be centralized before a single superior court judge. Bayer requested that all present and future cases be filed in the Middlesex County Superior Courts as a mass tort or multicounty litigation. That request was denied by the Supreme Court on January 8, 2013. The decision was reversed by the Court on May 13, 2013 and has centralized more than 60 Mirena cases before Bergen County Judge Brian Martinotti.
Also in January 2013, a petition to consolidate all federal Mirena lawsuits before the Circuit Court for the Northern District of Ohio was filed by the plaintiffs. This multidistrict litigation is designed to prevent multiple disclosures, avoid different rulings from different judges and test the waters in jury reaction to the cases. On April 8, 2013 the judicial panel on multidistrict litigation (JPML) granted the request but decided to centralize it in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York before Judge Cathy Seibel. Test cases are expected to be heard before the end of 2015.
Class Action vs. Multidistrict Litigation
Multidistrict (federal) and multicounty (state) lawsuits are different from class action lawsuits although they may share a few common elements. Some discovery proceedings may be integrated and applied to every case such as depositions and investigations into company documentation. The rulings made by the presiding judge would also apply to all cases.
In a class action lawsuit, the awarding of damages is equal to each plaintiff according to a designated category. The determination of each designation would be based on the type of injury received and all awards to plaintiffs in a single category would be the same. Contrarily, in a multidistrict or multicounty Mirena case, each individual plaintiff is awarded based on the particular physical and emotional damages she received along with the facts of her particular case.
At this time a class action Mirena lawsuit has not been established and cases are scheduled to move forward individually. Every plaintiff should have retained a qualified attorney that specializes in defective medical devices. There are statutes of limitation that apply at both federal and state levels.
Dolman Law Group is currently seeking women who have suffered after the insertion of the Mirena IUD for possible compensation. If you have experienced the migration of the device, suffered from pseudotumor cerebri, experienced abnormal pain or bleeding or have had to undergo surgery to have the device removed, our defective medical device team would like to speak with you and evaluate your case. You may be entitled to cash compensation for pain and suffering, medical bills and lost wages. Call the Dolman Law Group today at (727) 853-6275 for a free consultation. Please act quickly as the time to file will expire.
Dolman Law Group
5435 Main Street
New Port Richey, FL 34652