Broken Kugel Hernia Patch Lawsuit Set for Trial to Begin July 28

  • Written by: Staff Writers

The second “bellwether” trial in the Kugel hernia patch litigation is scheduled to begin later this summer, involving a case where the plaintiff suffered severe internal injuries from a broken ring on the Kugel patch.

According to a scheduling order issued this week by Chief Judge Mary M. Lisi, who is presiding over the consolidated multidistrict litigation (MDL) for the Kugel patch, jury selection is set to begin July 28 in a case filed by Christopher Thorpe, of North Carolina, and his wife, Laura. The couple is suing Davol, Inc. and C.R. Bard, Inc. over a defective Comosix Kugel patch, which contained a plastic ring around the perimeter that broke.

Thorpe claims to have suffered an abdominal wall abscess and fistula from the broken Kugel hernia patch ring. Eventually, the broken ring became stained with bile and caused Thorpe to become septic. Thorpe required numerous surgeries to repair the damage and the broken Kugel hernia patch lawsuit claims he continues to suffer physical pain.

Between 2005 and 2007, three separate Kugel patch recalls were issued for different sizes and models of the hernia mesh. The recalls were issued because the plastic ring in the mesh was found to be prone to break, potentially causing bowel perforations, chronic intestinal fistula and other internal injuries that often require additional surgery to remove the mesh.

There are more than 1,300 other Kugel hernia mesh lawsuits pending in the U.S. District Court for the District of Rhode Island, where all federal lawsuits have been centralized under Judge Lisi. Another 1,774 lawsuits over the Composix Kugel patch have been centralized in Rhode Island Superior Court under Presiding Justice Alice B. Gibney.

Thorpe’s case is the second “bellwether” Kugel hernia patch trial in the federal MDL, which are cases selected for early trials to help the parties get a sense of how juries will respond to evidence that may be similar to what will be presented in other cases. The results of the bellwether trials may lead to the settlement of Kugel hernia patch lawsuits over broken rings in other cases.

The first Kugel bellwether trial, which involved a case brought by John Whittfield, ended in a defense verdict last month. While the jury in that case found that Davol and Bard were negligent in the design of the Composix Kugel patch, they indicated that the plaintiff did not provide that his hernia repair problems were directly caused by or contributed by the negligent design.

At least two other cases have also been selected for bellwether trials in the Kugel litigation, with those trials expected to begin later this year.

Tags: , , ,


  1. Michael Reply

    Unfortunately the courts are slow on this. The case as promised by the Lib Lisi was supposed to be held every 6 weeks, hmm sleeping on the job Lisi or is this all a farce on your court and do you know how to count.

  2. Joseph Reply

    just to let you know I suffered
    and almost died from that Kugel mess. My name is Joseph . I am 58 years
    old. I live in Las Vegas since 1986. For the past 8 years my life has been
    nothing but assaulted and degraded by the medical community. In late 2001 I had
    the kugel patch and put in my abdomen and in the begining of 2003 I had a bulge
    on my abdomen and in 2005 I was rushed to the hospital because I felt extreme
    pain when the patch broke and traveled through my body, a national recall by the
    Davol Bard composix Kugel Hernia Patch people, In 2007 they had a national
    recall on one of their hernia patch, but only recalled one of batch numer due
    to the center ring of the patch breaking and tearing through the body organs and
    straggling the small intestines like it did to me, but that left me out of their
    recall. The scope of the recall was to narrow, I have the product number with
    a number 1, the first defected one, I believe this because of what happened to
    me, and their recall is with the number 2 I had all the same complications, but
    because of this technology, now I’m dealing with all the rejections from the
    medical people and the attorneys. I was eight months in a recovery, lost lots of money and got nothing from the people that did this to me. I also now
    need to wear a uncomfortable abdomen binder forever because of a big bulge in
    the left middle of my abdomen and now my body is deformed, and again this I
    believe, that my doctor started to reject me from my last 2 visits to him.
    I felt his tiredness of dealing with me. I never got any more help from him.
    He told me to find someone else. My ability of life is diminishing and aging,
    because I can’t do the things you can do to keep you strong. I all ready tried
    three years ago to put an end to this for me but I have got nowhere.
    This is just half of my story. Thank You

  3. Robert Reply

    After having read hundreds of blogs I can only feel empathy and sorrow for all these vicims that have ben “stroked” by big pharmuticals againsy us peons. I have had between 5-7 surgeries related to ths failure depeding on who you beleve. 8 years for me no and no settlement in sight! I caa’t make heads or tails out ogf the internet stories because they are so randomly classified. By the way my lawyer never asked me if I wanted to me part of a class action suit. I thought he was my lawyer representing me!!. In fact in 4/12 years I;ve only spoken to my lawyer 4 or 5 times and each time he seem more annoyed. Anyone elsi in this shape????

  • Share Your Comments

  • Have Your Comments Reviewed by a Lawyer

    Provide additional contact information if you want an attorney to review your comments and contact you about a potential case. This information will not be published.
  • NOTE: Providing information for review by an attorney does not form an attorney-client relationship.

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
Contact A Lawyer

Contact A Lawyer

Have A Potential Case Reviewed By An Attorney

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.