Alabama Jury Rules in Favor of DePuy Orthopedics in Hip Implant Liability Case

Ahmed V. DePuy Orthopedics

Case Background

On April 12, 2024, Pamela Ahmed filed this product liability lawsuit against DePuy Orthopedics before the Circuit Court of Mobile County, Alabama. However, the lawsuit was transferred to the United States District Court for the Southern District of Alabama. The case was assigned to District Judge Kristi K. DuBose and referred to Magistrate Judge Katherine P. Nelson. [Case number: 1:22cv190]

Cause

Pamela Ahmed, aged 61, had experienced persistent hip pain for years. In 2020, she visited her orthopedist, Dr. Todd Engerson, who suggested a hip replacement surgery. Dr. Engerson preferred the Pinnacle system for the procedure, despite its known risk of “liner dissociation,” which indeed occurred in her case. This issue meant that the liner fractured, impacting the hip replacement manufactured by DePuy Orthopedics of Warsaw, Indiana.

The surgery took place on November 4, 2020, and initially appeared successful. Unfortunately, the replacement failed within a few weeks. As a result, Dr. Engerson performed a revision surgery on March 1, 2021. During this procedure, Ahmed developed an infection, and she later experienced two hip dislocations in June and August. Ahmed continued to suffer from pain and faced a permanent disability.

Ahmed sued DePuy claiming that the Pinnacle system violated an implied warranty of merchantability, arguing that it was either unsuitable or unfit for its intended purpose.

Damages

Ahmed’s damages included pain and suffering, mental anguish, and extreme medical costs. Ahmed also sustained a physical disability and experienced significant anxiety. She requested a jury trial.

Key Arguments and Proceedings

Legal Representation

• Plaintiff(s): Pamela A. Ahmed
  • Counsel for Plaintiff(s): Abby Morrow Richardson | John D. Richardson
  • Experts for Plaintiff(s): Richard Edwards | Dr. Kenneth Sands

• Defendant(s): Medical Device Business Services, Inc. f/k/a Depuy Orthopedics, Inc.
  • Counsel for Defendant(s): Erin Pauley | Joseph P. H. Babington | Jessica Davidson | Rachel Palmer | Stephen Eric Rumanek | Terri Bruksch
  • Experts for Defendant(s): Leanne Turner | Dr. Roy Crowninshield | Dr. Steven Barrington

Claims

Ahmed alleged that the medical device was defective and unreasonably dangerous due to the Defendant’s failure to properly design, manufacture, and distribute it. This negligence led to the device failing and causing damage and injury to Ahmed It was also claimed that the Defendants concealed the device’s defects and misled medical providers by asserting it was safe for implantation.

Physicians relied on the Defendants’ assurances and purchased the product and its components. Under Alabama law, Ahmed was a third-party beneficiary of the device, which was intended for general public use. The device was mostly hidden from public view, and any disclaimers were not clearly visible.

The product carried an implied warranty of merchantability and fitness for its intended use. It was designed for use by the Plaintiff and the general public. Ahmed argued that the Defendants were negligent in 2020 for failing to verify the product’s safety before marketing it. Consequently, Ahmed had to undergo a second surgery to address the issues.

Defense

DePuy denied all allegations levied under this product liability lawsuit. It defended itself by asserting that its system was well-designed and suitable for its intended use. The defense argued that the Plaintiff’s surgeon, Dr. Engerson, continued to use the system and considered it effective.

DePuy described the Pinnacle system as reliable, boasting a success rate exceeding 98% after 10 years. Additionally, the system complied with all industry and FDA standards.

DePuy attributed the failure to Ahmed’s deformed spinal anatomy, a result of a severe motor vehicle accident in the 1980s. They also noted that the placement of the femoral cap had put additional stress on the system.

Expert Testimony

Ahmed’s experts on the alleged defect included Richard Edwards, an engineer from Birmingham, Alabama, and Dr. Kenneth Sands, an orthopedic specialist from Melbourne, Florida.

DePuy’s experts at the trial were Leanne Turner, a mechanical engineer who was an employee of DePuy, Dr. Roy Crowninshield, a mechanical engineer, and Dr. Steven Barrington, an orthopedic specialist from Montgomery, Alabama.

Jury Verdict

On June 06, 2024, the Alabama jury found that the Pinnacle hip replacement system was suitable or fit for the ordinary purpose for which hip replacement systems are used. The verdict was returned in favor of DePuy Orthopedics.

On the same day, Judge Kristi K. DuBose entered a judgment consistent with the verdict, and the product liability lawsuit was dismissed.

Court Documents:

Verdict