Texas Woman Files Cartiva Big Toe Implant Lawsuit In Texas Federal Court Against Defendants Cartiva, Inc., Wright Medical Group, N.V., and Stryker, B.V.
On October 14, 2022 a woman residing in Williamson County, Texas filed a lawsuit in the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas, styled Cathy Atkinson v. Cartiva, Inc., Wright Medical Group, N.V., and Stryker, B.V. f/ka Wright Medical Group (“Wright”) f/k/a Cartiva, Inc., Personal Injury Case No. 22-1037, alleging, among other things, that she suffered and continues to suffer injuries and damages after having a Cartiva Synthetic Cartilage Implant (“Cartiva SCI”) surgically implanted.
According to the Cartiva Toe Implant lawsuit complaint, on November 16, 2018 Plaintiff had a Cartiva SCI implanted to treat big toe arthritis (a form of arthritis in the big toe that affects about 2.2 million people in the U.S. that can lead to deterioration of the joint’s cartilage resulting in a painful bone-on-bone painful rubbing of the bones).
The Plaintiff in the Cartiva Toe Implant lawsuit alleges that on November 2, 2020 she was told that her Cartiva SCI had failed and that on December 30, 2020, she underwent another surgery to remove the Cartiva SCI and to implant an Arthrosurface device. Plaintiff further alleges that thereafter she also required a “fusion” surgery in 2021, because of ongoing severe pain.
The Cartiva Toe implant lawsuit lawsuit reportedly brings claims for: “Negligent-Design, Manufacture, Misbranded And Improper Transfer of 510(k)/PMA Without FDA Approval,” “Misbranded And Adulterated Device,” “State Law And Common Law Claims of Product Liability And Negligence for Class II Devices/Class III Devices,” “Breach of Express Warranty,” “Breach of Implied Warranty,” “Failure to Warn,” “Violation of Texas Deceptive Trade Practices Act/Treble Damages” and “Punitive/Exemplary Damages.”
The Plaintiff in the Cartiva Toe Implant lawsuit reportedly demands, among other things, a judgment against Defendants including compensatory damages, past and future medical expenses, as well as the cost associated with past and future life care, past and future lost wages and loss of earning capacity, past and future emotional distress, consequential damages, noneconomic damages including pain, suffering, and loss of enjoyment of life, disgorgement of profits, restitution, punitive damages, treble damages, reasonable attorneys’ fees, costs of the lawsuit and pre-judgment interest.
If you suffered injury or complications from a Cartiva toe implant, you may be able to recover compensation from a Cartiva toe implant lawsuit case.
If You Have Thoughts On The Cartiva Toe Implant Lawsuit, Share Your Comments Below.