Hip Replacement Lawsuit Settlement Amounts

Still Waiting On Your Lawsuit To Settle?
Get Legal Funding Today.


Legal Funding Helps You Get
What Your Case Merits.

Hip Replacement Lawsuit Settlement Amounts

Tens of thousands of defective hip implant lawsuits have been filed against various manufacturers and distributors by patients alleging hip replacement failure. Most hip replacement lawsuits involve metal-on-metal hip replacement systems, which have reportedly caused pain and other side effects, often requiring revision surgery. While many hip replacement lawsuits have been settled, attorneys are still investigating and filing defective hip complaints.

Metal-on-Metal Hip Implant

Hip replacement is one of the most common procedures, with over 300,000 total hip arthroplasties performed each year in the U.S. alone. According to the New York Times, metal-on-metal (MOM) implants made up one-third of hip replacements. Hip implants typically comprise an artificial ball that fits inside of a cup. With metal-on-metal implants, both these parts are made of metal—generally a combination of cobalt and chromium. Over time these metal components grind together and can cause metallosis, depriving the area of oxygen and potentially killing off soft tissue and bone where tiny bits of metal accumulate in the hip joint and get into the bloodstream, resulting in tissue damage and systemic toxicity.
Metallosis can lead to the following side effects:
– Implant failure
– Implant loosening
– Local tissue necrosis
– Deterioration of bone around the implant
– Cysts or pseudotumors
– Severe joint pain
– Osteolysis
Osteolysis, loss of bone around the hip replacement, has been cited as the cause of almost 75 percent of all hip implant failures.

Metal-on-Metal Hip Implant Research and Studies

The failure rate for metal-on-metal (MOM) devices is shown to be significantly higher than the failure rate of hip implants made from other materials. One report estimated the failure rate of certain devices was 30 percent within six years. The FDA has warned of risks associated with MOM implants, and numerous studies have shown premature device failure. The National Joint Registry in the UK found that approximately one in 12 recipients of MOM devices may require corrective surgery within five years of implantation. A 2015 study concluded that clinicians “must remain vigilant and be thorough with their assessment and investigation of patients” with MOM implants. The British Medical Journal (BMJ Open, April 2016) reported that investigators found an “unacceptably high” risk for failure and revision surgery associated with a commonly used metal-on-metal hip implant.
After several MOM hip implants were approved via the 501(k) process, the devices were found to express small amounts of metal and metallic residue through wear, causing inflammation of surrounding tissue and introducing metallosis, which is highly toxic. The Daily Telegraph (April 2016) released documents proving that at least one company, Johnson & Johnson’s DePuy Orthopedic unit, was aware of these problems for decades and did not warn surgeons or patients. The company chose instead to market all-metal hip replacements toward younger and more physically active patients, telling orthopedic surgeons that the implants would last longer and be more durable.

Hip Implant Manufacturers

Hip Implant manufacturers claimed their devices are more durable and would last longer than devices already on the market, such as metal-on-polyethylene and ceramic-on-ceramic models. Lawsuits have been filed against most every manufacturer that recalled its faulty hip replacement and hip resurfacing products The following hip implant manufacturers and products have been named in lawsuits:

  • Depuy: ASR XL Acetabular System, ASR Hip Resurfacing System, Pinnacle
  • Zimmer: Durom Cup, M/L Taper Hip Prosthesis with Kinectiv Technology (MLKT)
  • Biomet: M2A Magnum
  • OMNI: Apex K2
  • Smith & Nephew: Emperion Hip System, Birmingham Hip, Modular SMF Hip System, Modular Redapt Revision Femoral Hip System
  • Stryker: Rejuvenate, ABG II Modular-neck Hip Stems
  • Wright Medical: Conserve Plus, Profemur Z Hip System

Hip Implant Lawsuits, Verdicts and Settlements

To be successful in a hip replacement lawsuit, the plaintiff must prove that the implant had either a design defect or a manufacturing defect, or that the manufacturer gave inadequate warnings about the dangers associated with the implant. Injured patients claim the MOM hip implants have a defective design that caused them to fail within a few years and that the manufacturer failed to warn of its dangers. Some patients have required revision surgery.
Most all hip implant cases have been consolidated into a multidistrict litigation (MDL), which happens when multiple lawsuits involving common issues are pending in different districts. An MDL can streamline pretrial proceedings and avoid duplicative discovery by joining similar cases into one action.

Many hip replacement recall lawsuits have been settled. After patients filed lawsuits and their attorneys prosecuted the cases, a number of hip implant manufacturers agreed to settle the outstanding cases. These hip replacement lawsuit settlement amounts provide significant compensation — in some cases verdicts amounted to billions of dollars. Some injured patients, however, are still waiting for settlements.

Biomet Hip Replacement Problems

Patients with Biomet hip implants have reported the device was defectively designed and caused metallosis.

Biomet Hip Lawsuits

Biomet lawsuits allege the M2A Magnum metal-on-metal hip replacement system failed too soon after being implanted. By January 2015, all the M2a Magnum cases were settled for $56 million.

Zimmer Hip Replacement Problems

Sales of the Zimmer Durom Cup were suspended on July 22, 2008, due to issues with the surgical technique instructions. At the same time, Zimmer reported that problems with the hip post surgery required revision up to 5.7 percent of the time.
Attorneys investigating Zimmer Biomet hip lawsuits claim the MLKT implant’s combination of metals creates a risk of generating metal debris that can lead to metallosis. Zimmer is also accused of inadequately testing the device for safety.

Zimmer Biomet Hip Lawsuits

Zimmer settled most of its Durom Cup lawsuits in March 2016 for an estimated $314 million. As of March 2016, there were 466 cases still pending in the Multi-District Litigation (MDL).

In March 2017, a judge in New Mexico ordered Zimmer Inc. to pay $2million to a man who was injured by a Zimmer Kinectiv hip implant system. The plaintiff suffered metallosis after hip implant surgery with the M/L Taper Hip Prosthesis with Kinectiv Technology (MLTK) and a cobalt-chromium head in 2010. He required a second revision surgery in 2011. (Michael Brian McDonald Ph.D. v Zimmer Inc. et al, Case No. D-202-CV-2013-04060, Second Judicial District, County of Bernalillo, State of New Mexico )

DePuy Hip Replacement Problems

Thousands of people who received DePuy Orthopaedics’s ASR and Pinnacle hip implants accuse the company of failing to warn patients of the risks of metal-on-metal hip replacements.

DePuy Orthopaedics ASR hip replacement system is a MOM hip replacement device. The ASR XL Acetabular System was recalled in August 2010, amid reports of a higher than normal failure rate. Among the issues allegedly linked to the DePuy ASR XL was the releasing of metal particles that came off the device and entered into the blood stream, causing problems with the nervous system and heart, and potentially causing cobalt poisoning. Furthermore, the metal particles could cause damage to the bone and/or tissue surrounding the implant, which could result in loosening of the implant.

DePuy Pinnacle is a hip implant system that allows the surgeon to determine whether the liner inserted in the cup is metal, ceramic or polyethylene. The Pinnacle is linked to a high failure rate due to the stem loosening and falling out of the cup.

DePuy Hip Lawsuits

DePuy Pinnacle: Nearly 10,000 DePuy hip replacement lawsuits are still pending and DePuy lawsuits involving its Pinnacle hip implants are still being filed. Juries in three trials since 2015 have awarded plaintiffs more than $1.7 billion in verdicts over DePuy’s Pinnacle hip implants. By November, 2017 DePuy had lost three of four bellwether trials over its Pinnacle hip (Bellwether trials are “test cases” to see how lawsuits may play out in front of actual juries. These can determine if more lawsuits should go forward or whether to settle the remaining cases.)
In December, 2016 Johnson & Johnson and its subsidiary Depuy Orthopedics was ordered by a Dallas federal jury to pay $247 million to six plaintiffs who say they were injured by the Pinnacle hip implants, according to Reuters. It is the third win of four test trials in Dallas federal court, where about 9,000 of the cases are pending

DePuy ASR:
In November 2013 Johnson & Johnson settled more than 8,000 lawsuits for $4 billion. In March 2015, DePuy extended the hip replacement lawsuit settlement amounts to cover an additional 1,800 claims, with an additional cost of $420 million. After DePuy ASR lawsuits were filed, the company’s own test results showed that they knew the 5-year failure-rate, which resulted in the recall, was actually 40 percent.

As of December 2017, there were 1,641 lawsuits over DePuy ASR hips pending in Ohio federal court. Another 9,308 lawsuits over DePuy’s Pinnacle hips were pending in Texas MDL court. DePuy hip lawsuits claim the company, along with its parent corporation, Johnson & Johnson, knew about problems with the devices, but failed to warn people of the risks. Internal company documents presented at the first ASR hip trial appeared to back up those claims.
Settlements and verdicts involving DePuy hip implants total roughly $6.2 billion, though courts have reduced some of the jury awards. More lawsuits are likely to be filed ahead of the latest round of settlements.

Stryker Hip Replacement Problems

In recall notice (August 2016), Stryker warned that it had received “higher than expected” complaints that the LFIT V40 femoral head device, which is designed to fit into the hip socket, failed to lock into place properly. The issue can cause severe complications including excessive metal debris wear from the cobalt-chromium head that can enter the bloodstream, resulting in metallosis. Other issues include spontaneous dissociation, where the femoral head disconnects from the hip due to metal corrosion, and the need for complicated revision surgery to replace the device.
In 2012, the Rejuvenate and BBG II Modular-Neck hip stems were recalled. Plaintiffs alleged the implants caused muscle and tissue damage, and required reparative surgery within two years.
Although Stryker marketed the two hip replacement systems as having metal components that were more durable than others, the metals corroded and wore away when they rubbed against the stem’s titanium coating.

Stryker Hip Replacement Lawsuits

More than 2,000 lawsuits filed in federal court in 39 states over the hip replacements were consolidated in MDL managed in Minnesota. In New Jersey, 2,600 cases were consolidated into MDL in state Superior Court.
In November, 2014 Stryker Corp. settled thousands of New Jersey and Minnesota claims involving its Rejuvenate and ABG II devices for $1billion.
In April, 2017 the U.S. Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation issued coordinating pretrial proceedings for another recalled Stryker hip replacement device, the LFIT Anatomic CoCr V40 Femoral Head, in U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts. According to its recent filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission, Stryker estimates spending between $2 billion and $2.2 billion to settle thousands of cases globally.

Wright Medical Hip Replacement Problems

By 2010, nearly 20 percent of Wright Conserve hips required revision surgery after they failed in less than five years. Patients alleged metallosis, damage to bone or muscle tissue and device loosening in lawsuits they filed. Similar problems were being reported with the Dynasty and Lineage models.

Wright Medical Hip Replacement Lawsuits

In November 2016 Wright Medical reached a $240 million settlement with nearly 1,300 people with faulty Conserve, Dynasty and Lineage implants. Another settlement was reached in October, 2017 that affects lawsuits in an Atlanta federal court and state courts in California, according to documents the company filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission.
Wright plans the following payouts:
• $7.9 million to settle 49 claims that missed out on the original settlement
• $5.1 million to settle 39 claims by the oldest people who brought lawsuits
• $76.75 million to settle all existing claims through October 1, 2017
Wright expects all payments will be completed by September 2019. In 2013, the company sold its hip and knee implant business for $290 million.

What you should do

If you are experiencing pain from your hip replacement, you may require revision surgery. Be sure to tell your doctors to keep the implant intact and unchanged, and take pictures whenever possible. Be sure to ask well in advance of your surgery.
Hip Replacement Lawsuit Funding & Hip Replacement Lawsuit Settlement Amounts
Patients who received hip replacement devices and suffered complications may be able to demand compensation and accountability from the implant manufacturers. Injured victims need to demonstrate that the implant is defective in some way. If your hip implant has been recalled, the probability of a defect is highly likely.
If you have suffered hip replacement side effects or a faulty hip implant, you may be seeking justice by filing a lawsuit. And given the increasing amounts of jury wins for plaintiffs, verdicts are expected to put pressure on hip replacement manufacturers to seek settlements in the thousands of lawsuits they still face. Unfortunately, the legal process is often long and drawn out, and you may have to wait months, or even years for a settlement. You may want to consider an advance on your settlement.

For more information on how to get pre-settlement funding for your faulty hip please go to our hip replacement lawsuit page or just click on the contact us button today!

"I talked to a couple of other legal funding companies first who promised a lot, but couldn't deliver. Pravati Capital kept their promise and took care of my needs."
Stacey F. – Atlanta, Georgia
" I was able to get on with my life thanks to Pravati Capital - including moving to a new apartment. I'm glad my lawyer put me in touch with them."
Laura S. – San Diego, California
“The cash advance I received from your company has really helped my family and I through these hard times, your help and support was greatly appreciated.”
Devin T. – Orlando, Florida
“Pravati Capital was very thorough and responsive to my calls and e-mails, unlike the previous legal funding company I had contacted. They did everything I expected and more. I would highly recommend them to my friends and family.”
Michael K – Dallas, Texas
We Can Help. Contact us at 1.844.454.4892