St. Jude Spinal Cord Stimulator Lawsuit

Our Spinal Cord Stimulator attorney at TruLaw is dedicated to supporting clients through the process of filing a Spinal Cord Stimulator lawsuit.

With extensive experience in product liability cases, Jessica Paluch-Hoerman and our partner law firms work with litigation leaders and medical experts to prove how defective spinal cord stimulator devices caused you harm.

TruLaw focuses on securing compensation for medical expenses, pain and suffering, lost income, and other damages resulting from your spinal cord stimulator injury.

Meet the Lead Spinal Cord Stimulator Attorney at TruLaw

Meet our lead Spinal Cord Stimulator attorney:

• Jessica Paluch-Hoerman: As founder and managing attorney of TruLaw, Jessica brings her experience in product liability and personal injury to her client-centered approach by prioritizing open communication and personalized attention with her clients. Through TruLaw and partner law firms, Jessica has helped collect over $3 billion on behalf of injured individuals across all 50 states through verdicts and negotiated settlements.

How much does hiring a Spinal Cord Stimulator lawyer from TruLaw cost?

At TruLaw, we believe financial concerns should never stand in the way of justice.

That’s why we operate on a contingency fee basis—with this approach, you only pay legal fees after you’ve been awarded compensation for your injuries.

If you or someone you love has experienced complications with spinal cord stimulator implants, you may qualify to seek compensation.

Contact TruLaw using the chat on this page to receive an instant case evaluation and determine your eligibility to join others in filing a Spinal Cord Stimulator Lawsuit today.

Patients implanted with spinal cord stimulators have reported a wide range of adverse outcomes, from minor discomfort to life-altering injuries.

The FDA has reported thousands of adverse events linked to spinal cord stimulator devices.

The severity of these injuries often requires extensive medical intervention, including revision surgeries, device removal procedures, and ongoing treatment for lasting damage.

Many patients report that their pain management issues worsened rather than improved after implantation, leading to decreased quality of life and substantial financial burdens.

The issues with St. Jude devices prompted several recalls, including those for the Eon IPG and Eon Mini IPG due to heating problems, and a recall for Eon Mini IPGs manufactured in April 2012 for delivering unexpected surges in stimulation.

St. Jude spinal cord stimulators have been associated with several specific complications:

1. Battery failures and malfunctions – Devices failing to hold charges or deliver consistent therapy, leaving patients without pain relief when most needed
2. Severe overheating – Multiple patients have reported first and second-degree burns caused by devices overheating during charging sessions
3. Unexpected electrical shocks – Users experiencing painful, sudden shocks from malfunctioning devices
4. Internal battery leakage – Weld failures within batteries allowing fluid to escape into surrounding tissue
5. Device migration – Implanted components shifting from their intended position, requiring additional surgeries to reposition or remove them
6. Lead fractures and disconnections – Broken electrode wires or disconnected components resulting in therapy interruption or inappropriate stimulation
7. Infection at implant sites – Bacterial infections requiring antibiotic treatment and often device removal

To qualify for a St. Jude spinal cord stimulator lawsuit, patients must gather extensive documentation proving both their injury and its connection to the device.

This documentation typically includes:

1. Medical records showing device implantation – Surgical notes, device identification including model and serial numbers, and implantation date
2. Evidence of complications – Medical records documenting all adverse effects experienced after implantation
3. Revision surgery or removal documentation – Records of any procedures performed to correct problems or remove the device
4. Ongoing treatment records – Documentation of continued medical care needed to address complications
5. Prior pain management history – Records showing the patient’s condition before implantation for comparison purposes

The timeframe for filing claims is strictly limited by state-specific statutes of limitations, which typically range from 2-3 years from the date of injury or discovery.

Some states apply the “discovery rule,” meaning the clock starts when the patient reasonably should have discovered the connection between their injury and the device.

If you or someone you love has experienced complications with spinal cord stimulator implants, you may qualify to seek compensation.

Contact TruLaw using the chat on this page to receive an instant case evaluation and determine your eligibility to join others in filing a Spinal Cord Stimulator Lawsuit today.

The legal foundation for St Jude spinal cord stimulator lawsuits rests primarily on product liability law, which holds medical device manufacturers accountable for products that cause harm when used as intended.

These devices, designed to alleviate chronic pain through surgically implanted components that send electrical impulses to block pain signals, must meet stringent safety and efficacy standards before and after reaching the market.

Plaintiffs in these cases typically pursue claims under several legal theories:

1. Strict liability: Arguing the device was inherently dangerous when it left the manufacturer’s control
2. Negligence: Claiming Abbott/St. Jude failed to exercise reasonable care in design, manufacturing, or providing warnings
3. Breach of warranty: Asserting the device failed to meet express or implied promises about safety and effectiveness
4. Fraud or misrepresentation: Alleging the company knowingly concealed risks or exaggerated benefits to doctors and patients seeking to relieve pain

FDA regulations play a central role in these lawsuits.

Manufacturers must comply with both premarket approval requirements and post-market surveillance obligations.

Failure to adhere to these regulations often serves as evidence of negligence or defective design in litigation.

The FDA has issued multiple communications regarding safety concerns with spinal cord stimulators.

In 2018, an investigation revealed that the FDA had received more than 80,000 adverse event reports related to these devices over a decade, highlighting serious risks that many patients claim were inadequately disclosed.

The FDA classified spinal cord stimulators as Class III medical devices—the highest risk category—requiring rigorous testing before approval.

Specific FDA warnings have addressed:

• MRI compatibility issues – Older St Jude devices were not MRI-compatible, potentially limiting diagnostic options and creating risks if patients underwent MRI scans with implanted devices
• Battery and charging problems – Warnings about overheating during recharging, battery depletion rates, and charging system failures
• Lead migration and fracture – Notices about leads moving from their intended position in the epidural space or breaking after implantation
• Electromagnetic interference – Cautions about device malfunction when exposed to certain electromagnetic fields

Despite this classification, many devices reached the market through the 510(k) clearance pathway that allows manufacturers to avoid clinical trials if they can demonstrate substantial equivalence to previously approved devices.

These warnings demonstrate the risks were identified and communicated by regulatory authorities, which plaintiffs argue should have prompted more aggressive action from the manufacturer.

Spinal cord stimulator lawsuits are being filed by individuals across the country who were injured by defective or malfunctioning spinal cord stimulators.

TruLaw is currently accepting clients for the spinal cord stimulator lawsuit.

A few reasons to choose TruLaw for your spinal cord stimulator lawsuit include:

• If We Don’t Win, You Don’t Pay: The spinal cord stimulator lawyers at TruLaw and our partner firms operate on a contingency fee basis, meaning we only get paid if you win.
• Expertise: We have decades of experience handling medical device cases similar to the spinal cord stimulator lawsuit.
• Successful Track Record: TruLaw and our partner law firms have helped our clients recover billions of dollars in compensation through verdicts and negotiated settlements.

If you or someone you love has experienced complications with spinal cord stimulator implants, you may qualify to seek compensation.

Contact TruLaw using the chat on this page to receive an instant case evaluation and determine your eligibility to join others in filing a Spinal Cord Stimulator Lawsuit today.