IVC Filters

Missouri IVC Filter Lawsuit

A mass tort is a civil case that derives from a singular product or event wherein multiple people are harmed the same way. To clarify, a car accident that hurts a single person in a single event, known as a single event case; however, a mass tort is an event where the same issues causing harm has occurred for a larger group of people, like the Inferior Vena Cava (IVC) filter.

What is an IVC Filter?

Designed to stop blood clots causing pulmonary embolisms, which is blood clots form and move to the lungs. The IVC filter typically comes at the cost of anywhere between three hundred and six hundred dollars. The implementation of the IVC filter is meant to be used temporarily because when left in place, the device could malfunction by way of the struts on the device breaking loose and migrating. This malfunction can cause serious harm and even death.

IVC Filters can be Dangerous

Lawsuits involving the IVC filters were filed in the United States District Court, Southern District of Indiana. The Indiana-based business, Cook, has had over one hundred and twenty lawsuits filed against them since August 27, 2015. According to the lawsuits against Cook, the filters were designed with serious defects that result in severe injury for the patient. The lawsuits that have been filed also state that a failure to give adequate instructions and precautions to the doctors and patients about the side effects and hazards that result from the use of the product.

IVC Filter Symptoms

  • A perforation of any organs, especially the heart or lungs
  • A perforation of the vena cava, a large vein delivering deoxygenated blood to the heart
  • Broken or cracked IVCs
  • A puncture to the aorta
  • Movement of the filter from the original location
  • Mechanisms of the device becoming detached
  • Problematic removal of the IVC device
  • Injury resulting in death

IVC Filter & Mass Tort Details

IVCs and Multidistrict Litigation

In mass tort cases, it is useful to use multidistrict litigation because the lawyer can argue legitimate facts that multiple clients have in common efficiently. Experienced attorneys that are skilled in mass tort, especially multidistrict litigation prospective attorneys, often burden the initial financial expense of growing a MDL case.

Handling Mass Tort Claims

Claims that are mass tort are dealt with a different manner than a singular case because of the multidistrict litigation. This sort of litigation becomes an impersonal affair due to the multitude of people joined in the lawsuit that have experienced injuries and suffering because of the device. Due to this fact, it is unlikely that a plaintiff would be able to converse with the mass tort attorney and be in court directly after for a trial. With mass torts, due to the many cases involved, an experienced mass tort attorney will quickly compile the cases and get them filed to avoid losing the ability to file the cases because of a statute of limitations.

Mass Tort Litigation Case and Expectations

With a vehicular accident, the victim will file a claim and have a personal experience throughout the claim process. The period of time it takes to do this can range from a couple of months to two years in most states. However, in a mass tort case, there can be a long period of time before the various parts of the lawsuit process begin to occur. Multidistrict litigation cases are often heard before a state court, wherein commonalities in multiple cases are heard within one courtroom proceeding. Sometimes handed back to allow for individual case to continue the way it would in a singular case event with case going to trial. Although, it is more typical that centralized litigation occurs prior and then lead to a collective settlement so that the at-fault party can avoid an endless amount of trials in the following years. The at-fault company will create a catalog of injury types that have occurred and give each one a valued dollar amount. At this stage, the plaintiff can choose to whether to accept the settlement, which is often how mass tort cases are resolved.

Our Reputation

The Krause & Kinsman Law Firm is made up of some of the nation’s foremost legal minds in the mass-tort field. That’s why our clients & co-counsel partners choose us.

Plaintiffs’ Steering Committee, and Co-Chair of the Law & Briefing Committee in MDL 2846:

In Re: Davol, Inc./C.R. Bard, Inc., Polypropylene Hernia Mesh Products Liability Litigation

Plaintiffs’ Steering Committee in MDL 2974:

In Re: Paragard IUD Products Liability Litigation

Plaintiffs’ Steering Committee in MDL 2924:

In Re: Zantac (Ranitidine) Products Liability Litigation

Along with the aforementioned MDLs,

Plaintiff’s Counsel has prosecuted thousands of cases across other Multi-District Litigations and Mass-Torts, including:

MDL No. 3043:

Acetaminophen ASD/ADHD Product Liability Litigation

MDL No. 2753:

Atrium Medical Corp. C-Qur Mesh Products Liability Litigation

MDL No. 2782:

Ethicon Physiomesh Flexible Composite Hernia Mesh Products Liability Litigation

MCL No. 627:

In Re: Physiomesh Litigation, MCL

MCL No. 633:

In Re: Prolene Hernia System Mesh Litigation

MDL No. 2750:

Cook Medical, Inc., IVC Filters Marketing, Sales Practices and Products Liability Litigation

MDL No. 2641:

Bard IVC Filters Products Liability Litigation

MDL No. 2326:

In Re: Boston Scientific Corp. Pelvic Repair System Products Liability Litigation

MDL No. 2606:

Benicar (Olmesartan) Product Liability Litigation

MDL No. 2666:

In Re: Forced Air Warming Devices Products Liability Litigation

MDL No. 2591:

Syngenta AG MIR162 Corn Litigation

MDL No. 2936:

In Re: Smity’s/CAM2303 Tractor Hydraulic Fluid Marketing, Sales Practices and Products Liability Litigation

MCL No. 630:

In Re: Proceed Mesh Litigation

MDL No. 2543:

In Re: General Motors LLC Ignition Switch Litigation

MDL No. 2004:

In Re: Mentor Corp. ObTape Transobturator Sling Products Liability Litigation

MDL No. 2187:

In Re: C. R. Bard, Inc. Pelvic Repair System Products Liability Litigation

MDL No. 2325:

In Re: American Medical Systems, Inc., Pelvic Repair System Products Liability Litigation

MDL No. 2327:

In Re: Ethicon, Inc., Pelvic Repair System Products Liability Litigation

MDL No. 2387:

In Re: Coloplast Corp. Pelvic Support Systems Products Liability Litigation

MDL No. 251:

In Re: Neomedic Pelvic Repair System Products Liability Litigation

Highly Awarded Trial Attorneys

The Krause & Kinsman Law Firm is one of the nation’s leading mass-tort & personal-injury law firms. The founding partners, Adam & Robert, have been selected to serve on steering committees for some of the largest pharmaceutical mass-tort cases.

Working With Us

Partnering with Krause & Kinsman is easy. When you partner with Krause & Kinsman, you can be sure that our mutual clients’ complex matters are handled with the utmost care and dedication. In addition to our top-notch representation, we will ensure our mutual clients receive frequent communication about the status of their cases.

Partner With Us

Why Us?

Recognized leaders in mass-torts with vast experience in complex litigation.

Your clients will appreciate the high-quality representation provided.

Your clients will consistently real-time updates on the status of their case via video, email, text, and phone.

Get real-time updates on the status of our mutual clients while their cases progress.

Collaborate on the case together and receive co-counsel fees.