The National Trial Lawyers
  • Home
    • Meet Our Team
    • Contact Us
    • Mission & Goals
    • FAQ
  • Webinars
  • News
  • Membership Directory
    • Top 100 Map – Civil Plaintiff
    • Top 100 Map – Criminal Defense
    • Top 40 Under 40 Map – Civil Plaintiff
    • Top 40 Under 40 Map – Criminal Defense
  • Top 100
    • Civil Plaintiff Officers / Executive Committee
    • Criminal Defense Officers / Executive Committee
    • Benefits
    • About
    • Top 100 Presidents Message
    • Diplomat
    • Membership Renewal
    • Member Profile Updates
    • Top 100 Badge
  • Top 40
    • Civil Plaintiff Officers / Executive Committee
    • Criminal Defense Officers / Executive Committee
    • Top 40 Under 40 Trial Academy Bootcamp
    • Benefits
    • About
    • Top 40 Presidents Message
    • Membership Renewal
    • Member Profile Updates
    • Top 40 Badge
  • Specialty Assoc
    • About
    • Shop
    • Officers
    • Membership Renewal
    • Member Profile Updates
  • Nominate
    • Top 100
    • Top 40
    • Specialty Association
    • Trial Lawyer Hall of Fame
    • Trial Lawyer of the Year
    • Trial Team of the Year
    • America’s Most Influential Trial Lawyer
    • America’s Most Influential Law Firm
    • Lifetime Achievement Award
  • Shop
  • Magazine
    • A-List
  • Education and Networking Agenda
    • Trial Lawyers Summit
    • Top 40 Under 40 Trial Academy Boot Camp
    • Mass Torts Made Perfect
    • The Lanier Trial Academy Master Class 6.0
    • The Business Of Law
    • Webinars
  • Hall of Fame
    • Trial Lawyer Hall of Fame

$28M Knee Replacement Verdict Reinstated by PA Supreme Court

Posted on November 24, 2015 by Larry Bodine

knee replacementThe Pennsylvania Supreme Court reinstated a woman’s $28 million verdict against medical device manufacturer Zimmer Inc., and marketing firm Public Communications Inc. for injuries she received while participating in a marketing video for a Zimmer product.

Margo Polett underwent knee replacement surgery in 2006.  One of her knees was replaced by Zimmer’s Gender Solutions knee, which was specifically designed for women. Several months after her surgery, Polett appeared in a marketing video for Zimmer.

Also see

$5 Million Award for Knee Replacement Gone Bad

In the video, Polett used both an exercise bike and treadmill.  She claimed that the video, she developed persistent pain that resulted in a series of additional surgeries to repair the damage.

A jury awarded Polett $27.6 million in damages after finding Zimmer 34 percent negligent, Public Communications Inc., 36 percent negligent and Polett 30 percent comparatively negligent.

Jury verdict voided on appeal

On appeal, the state’s Superior court voided the verdict and ordered a new trial on the basis that the jury instructions improperly shifted the burden of proof to the defendants to show medical evidence that Polett injured her knee by a means other than her participation in the marketing video.

An appeals court agreed with the superior court decision, finding that the jury instructions provided mislead the jury and unfairly shifted the burden to Zimmer and Public Communications.

State Supreme Court reinstates verdict

The Pennsylvania Supreme court reversed the appeals court ruling and reinstated the verdict.  The court found that the trial court instruction did not shift the burden of proof to the defendants because the trial court also gave the jury a comprehensive charge, which explained that Polett had the ultimate burden of proof to show that Zimmer’s negligence was the cause of her injuries.

The high court stated that if the jury instruction alone “was all that the jury received, then [Zimmer’s] argument would have substantial merit.”  At trial, Zimmer’s defense attorney argued that Polett could have re-injured her knee in other ways, including her failure to attend all her physical therapy appointments or her failure to wear a knee brace, but provided no evidence or testimony to support the argument.

The court determined that the “absence of such evidence” that Polett’s injuries were caused by any of the defense’s argument of possible causes, “would have been an exercise in speculation.”

 

The case is Margo Polett et al. v. Public Communications Inc. et al., case number 18 EAP 2014, in the Pennsylvania Supreme Court.

Posted in Blog, Personal Injury, Product Liability

Comments are closed.

Recent Posts

Defrauded College Students Will Have $6 Billion Forgiven in a New Settlement

Defrauded College Students Will Have $6 Billion Forgiven in a New Settlement

June 24th, 2022

The Biden administration has agreed to cancel $6 billion in student loans for about 200,000 former students who say they were[Read More...]
An Iowa City Settles Lawsuit Over a Deadly Police Shooting For $5 Million

An Iowa City Settles Lawsuit Over a Deadly Police Shooting For $5 Million

June 24th, 2022

Burlington, Iowa, has agreed to pay $5 million to settle a wrongful death lawsuit brought by the mother of a man who was shot[Read More...]
Co-Owners File a $695 Million Lawsuit Against Georgia Power Over a Contract Dispute

Co-Owners File a $695 Million Lawsuit Against Georgia Power Over a Contract Dispute

June 22nd, 2022

The owners of a majority share of a nuclear power plant being expanded in Georgia are suing lead owner Georgia Power Co., cla[Read More...]
A Tesla Worker Rejects a $15 Million Race Bias Settlement

A Tesla Worker Rejects a $15 Million Race Bias Settlement

June 22nd, 2022

A Black former elevator operator at Tesla Inc's flagship California assembly plant on Tuesday rejected a $15 million award in[Read More...]
Juneteenth Freedom Day

Juneteenth Freedom Day

June 13th, 2022

History Prior to Juneteenth African tribe members were kidnapped, sold into slavery in the American colonies, and exp[Read More...]

Contact Us | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy

Attorney information and content provided on this website is provided for the benefit of members of The National Trial Lawyers and as a public service by Legal Associations Management, Inc. The website and all data are the property of Legal Associations Management, Inc. Data, including without limitation attorney information and content, on the site may not be mined, sold, or used commercially for any purpose without the explicit written consent of Legal Associations Management, Inc. This site may not be accessed by any automated program for extracting data for any use. By accessing and using the site you agree that you will not develop, support or use software, devices, scripts, robots, or any other means or processes (including crawlers, browser plug-ins and add-ons, or any other technology) to scrape data or otherwise copy profiles and other data. Unauthorized use or attempted unauthorized use of this system may subject you to both civil and criminal penalties.