Attorney Jessica Paluch-Hoerman, founder of TruLaw, has over 28 years of experience as a personal injury and mass tort attorney, and previously worked as an international tax attorney at Deloitte. Jessie collaborates with attorneys nationwide — enabling her to share reliable, up-to-date legal information with our readers.
This article has been written and reviewed for legal accuracy and clarity by the team of writers and legal experts at TruLaw and is as accurate as possible. This content should not be taken as legal advice from an attorney. If you would like to learn more about our owner and experienced injury lawyer, Jessie Paluch, you can do so here.
TruLaw does everything possible to make sure the information in this article is up to date and accurate. If you need specific legal advice about your case, contact us by using the chat on the bottom of this page. This article should not be taken as advice from an attorney.
To hire the best transvaginal mesh lawyer for your case, look for an attorney with extensive experience in product liability cases and a proven track record of success in vaginal mesh lawsuits.
Choose a lawyer who works on a contingency fee basis, meaning you only pay if you win your case.
The ideal attorney will have expertise in handling medical device litigation and access to medical experts who can help prove how defective surgical mesh devices caused harm.
On this page, we’ll provide an overview of what makes a transvaginal mesh lawyer qualified to handle your case, questions to ask during your initial transvaginal mesh consultation, and much more.
Look for a law firm that has recovered substantial compensation for clients through verdicts and settlements, ideally in the billions of dollars.
The best transvaginal mesh lawyers will be dedicated to supporting clients throughout the entire legal process, from initial consultation to resolution of the case.
They should have a deep grasp of the complications associated with transvaginal mesh, including mesh erosion and its symptoms, and be able to effectively argue your case against large transvaginal mesh manufacturers.
If you or a loved one has suffered from complications after receiving a transvaginal mesh implant, you may be eligible to seek compensation.
Contact TruLaw using the chat on this page to receive an instant case evaluation that can determine if you qualify for the Transvaginal Mesh lawsuit today.
Mesh litigation requires specific expertise beyond general personal injury law, as these cases involve detailed medical evidence, FDA regulatory history, and multi-district litigation experience that not all attorneys possess.
When evaluating potential legal representation, you need to assess whether an attorney has the specialized knowledge and resources to handle the unique challenges of transvaginal mesh cases.
Attorneys handling mesh cases must grasp detailed medical terminology including pelvic organ prolapse (POP), stress urinary incontinence (SUI), and mesh erosion rates that affect approximately 2% of SUI patients and 4% of POP patients within the first two years.
Experienced lawyers maintain established relationships with urogynecologists and pelvic floor specialists who can review medical records, identify complications, and provide expert testimony about how vaginal mesh implants caused specific injuries.
Your attorney should have access to medical experts who are familiar with the various types of mesh complications:
These relationships allow attorneys to quickly identify whether mesh complications align with known failure patterns documented in FDA safety communications and medical literature.
Multi-District Litigation (MDL) consolidates similar federal cases before one judge for coordinated pretrial proceedings, requiring attorneys to grasp unique procedural rules and case management orders.
The transvaginal mesh MDLs, overseen by Judge Joseph Goodwin in the Southern District of West Virginia starting in 2012, have resulted in over $8 billion in settlements and verdicts, with individual case values typically ranging from $150,000 to $450,000.
Experienced mesh attorneys demonstrate their qualifications through:
Firms that actively litigate cases rather than simply collecting and referring them maintain stronger negotiating positions with manufacturers.
With approximately 95% of mesh MDL cases now resolved, attorneys must demonstrate experience handling both consolidated proceedings and individual state court actions where remaining cases proceed.
Transvaginal mesh litigation requires substantial financial resources, as cases often involve multiple expert witnesses, extensive medical record review, and protracted discovery processes that can cost hundreds of thousands of dollars before resolution.
Smaller firms lacking these resources may pressure clients into accepting inadequate settlements or fail to properly develop cases, thereby limiting potential compensation.
Well-resourced firms demonstrate their capability through:
Contingency fee structures protect injured patients from financial risk, with attorneys typically receiving 33-40% of any recovery only after a successful resolution.
Firms handling mesh cases must have the financial stability to sustain multi-year litigation timelines without compromising case quality or pressuring clients into premature settlements.
While many attorneys advertise for vaginal mesh case representation, not all provide quality service.
Recognizing warning signs can protect victims from inadequate legal help and potential case mishandling.
Selecting the wrong attorney can result in lower settlements, delayed resolution, or even dismissed claims due to poor case preparation.
State bar ethics rules, particularly Rule 7.1 governing attorney advertising, explicitly prohibit lawyers from guaranteeing specific settlement amounts or case outcomes.
No ethical vaginal mesh lawyer can promise you’ll receive a particular dollar amount because each mesh case involves unique medical circumstances, surgical histories, and injury severity that affect compensation.
Red flags include attorneys who:
Legitimate lawyers provide case evaluations based on individual medical records, explaining potential value ranges based on similar cases while emphasizing that outcomes depend on specific evidence.
They discuss both strengths and weaknesses of your claim, setting realistic expectations about the litigation process and timeline.
Settlement mills that aggressively advertise and mass produce claim resolutions typically handle 200-300 cases per attorney, compared to quality firms managing 70 cases or fewer.
This excessive caseload prevents attorneys from providing individualized attention, thoroughly investigating medical histories, or developing strong liability arguments specific to each client’s injuries.
Warning signs of settlement mill practices:
Personal attention affects case preparation quality and potential outcomes, as attorneys who know their clients’ specific complications can negotiate more effectively with manufacturers.
Direct attorney access ensures important medical developments receive prompt attention and strategic decisions reflect your individual circumstances rather than assembly-line processing.
Many attorneys accept mesh cases only to refer them to other firms, collecting referral fees without performing any substantive work on your behalf or developing expertise in surgical mesh products litigation.
Trial capability strengthens negotiating positions even though most mesh cases settle, as manufacturers offer higher settlements when facing attorneys with proven courtroom success.
Verify actual courtroom experience by asking:
Firms that actively litigate mesh cases invest in developing liability theories, taking expert depositions, and preparing for trial even when expecting a settlement.
This preparation creates leverage during negotiations, as defense attorneys recognize when opposing counsel has both the willingness and ability to present cases before juries.
Asking specific questions during consultations helps determine whether a lawyer has the expertise and resources necessary for successful mesh litigation.
A prepared list ensures you gather information needed to compare attorneys effectively while evaluating their communication style and approach to client relationships.
Learning about an attorney’s specific mesh litigation experience reveals whether they possess the specialized knowledge required for these medically detailed cases.
Since transvaginal mesh settlements typically take six months to several years, you need an attorney with proven staying power and successful case histories.
Key experience questions to ask:
Request specific examples of case outcomes, recognizing that confidentiality may limit details but patterns should emerge.
Attorneys actively involved in mesh litigation can discuss their relationships with medical experts who review complications and provide testimony about device failures and surgical revision requirements.
Clear communication expectations prevent frustration during lengthy litigation processes, ensuring you remain informed about case developments and strategic decisions.
Knowing who handles day-to-day management helps set realistic expectations about attorney availability versus paralegal support.
Important communication questions include:
Quality firms establish communication protocols explaining when attorneys personally handle matters versus appropriate delegation to experienced staff.
Regular updates should include substantive information about case progress, not just acknowledgment that your case remains active.
Reviewing financial arrangements upfront prevents surprises and ensures alignment between attorney compensation and your recovery expectations.
Standard contingency fees for product liability cases range from 33% to 40%, though sophisticated mass tort litigation may reach 50% in some jurisdictions.
Financial questions requiring clear answers:
Reputable attorneys provide written fee agreements detailing all financial terms, including how expenses affect your net recovery.
They explain that while they advance costs during litigation, these amounts typically get reimbursed from any settlement or verdict before calculating attorney fees.
Knowing what to expect after hiring an attorney helps set realistic expectations for the journey ahead, from initial case development through potential resolution.
This knowledge allows you to actively participate in your case while recognizing which tasks require patience as your legal team builds the strongest possible claim.
The medical record collection process forms the foundation of any mesh case, requiring comprehensive documentation of your surgical history, complications, and treatment attempts.
While HIPAA allows providers 30 days to process requests, obtaining complete records often takes several weeks to months, particularly when multiple providers and hospitals are involved.
Required documentation typically includes:
Attorneys work with medical experts to establish causation between your transvaginal mesh devices and specific injuries, reviewing records to identify complication patterns consistent with known device failures.
Preserving the explanted mesh device if removed during revision surgery provides physical evidence for expert examination and potential testing.
Since the original mesh MDLs were dismantled in 2018 after resolving most cases, new lawsuits now proceed in individual state and federal courts rather than consolidated proceedings.
Your attorney determines the appropriate venue based on where you received treatment, where you currently reside, and which manufacturer’s product caused your injuries.
The filing process involves:
Location affects both procedural rules and potential jury pools, with some jurisdictions historically more favorable to plaintiffs in product liability cases.
Experienced attorneys recognize venue advantages and file strategically while meeting all jurisdictional requirements for your case.
The discovery process allows both sides to gather evidence through document requests, interrogatories, and depositions, with plaintiffs typically deposed along with up to two treating physicians.
Discovery deadlines vary by jurisdiction, with some courts extending timelines into 2025 to accommodate ongoing litigation needs.
Resolution paths include, but are not limited to:
Bellwether trials from 2012-2019 resulted in verdicts ranging from $20 million to over $100 million, establishing values that influenced subsequent settlements averaging $40,000 to $450,000.
Your attorney evaluates offers based on your specific complications including weakened or damaged tissue, revision surgeries, ongoing symptoms, and impact on quality of life to determine whether proposed settlements adequately compensate your injuries.
Selecting the right attorney requires careful evaluation of all information gathered during consultations, balancing professional qualifications with personal comfort levels.
This decision impacts your case outcome and overall experience throughout legal proceedings, making thorough comparison and awareness of agreements vital before committing to representation.
Creating a systematic comparison of attorneys consulted helps identify which firm best matches your needs and expectations for mesh litigation representation.
Document key factors from each consultation including experience levels, resources available, communication approaches, and overall impressions to make an informed decision.
Important comparison factors include:
Online reviews provide additional perspective, though legal services reviews require careful interpretation since detailed case information remains confidential.
Focus on patterns regarding communication, professionalism, and follow-through rather than specific case outcomes when evaluating attorney ratings on platforms like Avvo, which consider response time, legal knowledge, and client service factors.
Retainer agreements establish the contractual relationship between attorney and client, defining scope of representation, fee arrangements, and mutual responsibilities throughout the case.
These binding contracts require careful review to ensure you recognize all terms before signing, as they govern the entire attorney-client relationship.
Key provisions requiring attention include:
Exercise your right to ask questions about any unclear provisions, request modifications to terms that concern you, and take time to consider the agreement before signing.
Reputable attorneys welcome questions and explain complicated legal language in understandable terms, ensuring you make informed decisions about representation.
Product liability statutes of limitations typically range from one to four years, with most states allowing two years from the date the injury was discovered to file claims.
The discovery rule may extend deadlines when injuries manifest years after implantation of surgical mesh, but prompt action remains advisable to preserve evidence and witness memories.
State-specific considerations affecting filing deadlines:
While the discovery rule provides some protection for delayed complications related to vaginal wall issues, acting promptly ensures your attorney has maximum time to develop your case properly.
Avoid pressure to sign immediately with any firm, but recognize that unnecessary delays risk losing valuable legal rights and potential compensation including punitive damages for mesh-related injuries.
Our Transvaginal Mesh attorney at TruLaw is dedicated to supporting clients through the process of filing a Transvaginal Mesh 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 mesh implants caused you harm.
TruLaw focuses on securing compensation for medical expenses, multiple corrective surgeries, pain and suffering including painful sexual intercourse, lost income, and other damages resulting from your severe complications.
We recognize the physical and emotional toll that Transvaginal Mesh complications have on your life and provide the personalized guidance you need when seeking justice.
Meet our lead Transvaginal Mesh attorney:
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 a loved one experienced pain, bleeding, infection, organ perforation, mesh erosion impacting sexual intercourse, or other complications from vaginal mesh products, you may be eligible to seek compensation.
Contact TruLaw using the chat on this page to receive an instant case evaluation and determine whether you qualify to join others in filing a Transvaginal Mesh lawsuit today.
Transvaginal mesh lawsuits are being filed by women across the country who suffered serious complications from pelvic mesh implants used during transvaginal repair procedures to treat pelvic organ prolapse and stress urinary incontinence.
TruLaw is currently accepting clients for the Transvaginal Mesh lawsuit.
A few reasons to choose TruLaw for your Transvaginal Mesh lawsuit include:
If you or a loved one suffered pain, infection, bleeding including urine leakage, organ damage, or other complications after receiving a transvaginal mesh implant through a surgical procedure, you may be eligible to seek compensation.
Contact TruLaw using the chat on this page to receive an instant case evaluation form that can determine if you qualify for the Transvaginal Mesh lawsuit today.
Most transvaginal mesh lawyers work on a contingency fee basis, meaning you pay no upfront costs, retainer fees, or hourly charges to pursue your claim.
Attorneys typically charge between 33-40 percent of any settlement or verdict as their fee, but this is only collected if they successfully recover compensation for you—making legal representation accessible regardless of your financial situation.
The contingency arrangement also means your attorney advances all case expenses including expert witness fees, medical record retrieval costs, court filing fees, and deposition expenses, which can total tens of thousands of dollars in mesh cases, with these costs reimbursed from your settlement or award only if the case succeeds.
No, under a contingency fee agreement, you owe nothing if your attorney cannot secure compensation through settlement or trial verdict.
This no-win, no-fee structure protects clients from financial risk while ensuring attorneys are motivated to pursue only strong cases and work diligently for maximum recovery.
Reputable mesh attorneys will clearly state in their retainer agreements that clients have no obligation for attorney fees or case expenses if the case is unsuccessful, though you should carefully review any agreement to confirm this protection and recognize what constitutes a “win” triggering fee obligations.
Transvaginal mesh cases typically take 18 months to 3 years from filing to resolution, though individual timelines vary based on factors including case difficulty, defendant cooperation, court schedules, and whether your case joins multidistrict litigation or proceeds individually.
Cases that settle during MDL negotiations often resolve faster than those requiring individual trials, while complications like multiple revision surgeries, ongoing medical treatment, or disputes over causation can extend timelines.
Your attorney should provide realistic expectations based on your specific circumstances and keep you informed of progress throughout the process, recognizing that while waiting for compensation is difficult, thorough case development often leads to better outcomes.
Many experienced mesh attorneys handle cases nationwide through pro hac vice admission, which allows them to practice temporarily in states where they’re not permanently licensed by associating with local counsel.
Modern technology enables effective representation across state lines through video conferencing for meetings and depositions, electronic document sharing, and digital case management systems that keep you connected with your legal team regardless of location.
When selecting an out-of-state attorney, confirm they have experience with multi-state litigation, established relationships with local counsel in your jurisdiction, and systems in place for regular communication and case updates despite the distance.
You likely have a viable mesh case if you received a transvaginal mesh implant to treat stress urinary incontinence or pelvic organ prolapse and subsequently experienced complications requiring revision surgery (such as mesh erosion, organ perforation, chronic pain, infections, or urinary problems).
Strong cases typically involve documented medical treatment for mesh complications, including surgical removal or revision procedures, ongoing symptoms affecting quality of life, and implantation of specific mesh products subject to FDA warnings or recalls.
Initial case evaluations are free and confidential, allowing experienced attorneys to review your medical history, identify your mesh manufacturer, and assess whether your complications meet legal criteria for compensation.
The discovery rule in most states extends the statute of limitations for mesh cases, meaning the filing deadline begins when you discovered or reasonably should have discovered your mesh-related injuries, not necessarily when the implantation occurred.
Many women don’t experience or recognize mesh complications until years after surgery, and courts generally acknowledge that serious complications like erosion, organ perforation, or chronic pain may not manifest immediately.
Even if your surgery was a decade ago, you may still have time to file if you only recently began experiencing complications or learned that your symptoms were caused by the mesh, though immediate consultation with an attorney is recommended to ensure you don’t miss applicable deadlines in your state.
Managing Attorney & Owner
With over 25 years of legal experience, Jessica Paluch-Hoerman is an Illinois lawyer, a CPA, and a mother of three. She spent the first decade of her career working as an international tax attorney at Deloitte.
In 2009, Jessie co-founded her own law firm with her husband – which has scaled to over 30 employees since its conception.
In 2016, Jessie founded TruLaw, which allows her to collaborate with attorneys and legal experts across the United States on a daily basis. This hypervaluable network of experts is what enables her to share the most reliable, accurate, and up-to-date legal information with our readers!
Here, at TruLaw, we’re committed to helping victims get the justice they deserve.
Alongside our partner law firms, we have successfully collected over $3 Billion in verdicts and settlements on behalf of injured individuals.
Would you like our help?
At TruLaw, we fiercely combat corporations that endanger individuals’ well-being. If you’ve suffered injuries and believe these well-funded entities should be held accountable, we’re here for you.
With TruLaw, you gain access to successful and seasoned lawyers who maximize your chances of success. Our lawyers invest in you—they do not receive a dime until your lawsuit reaches a successful resolution!
AFFF Lawsuit claims are being filed against manufacturers of aqueous film-forming foam (AFFF), commonly used in firefighting.
Claims allege that companies such as 3M, DuPont, and Tyco Fire Products failed to adequately warn users about the potential dangers of AFFF exposure — including increased risks of various cancers and diseases.
Depo Provera Lawsuit claims are being filed by individuals who allege they developed meningioma (a type of brain tumor) after receiving Depo-Provera birth control injections.
A 2024 study found that women using Depo-Provera for at least 1 year are five times more likely to develop meningioma brain tumors compared to those not using the drug.
Suboxone Tooth Decay Lawsuit claims are being filed against Indivior, the manufacturer of Suboxone, a medication used to treat opioid addiction.
Claims allege that Indivior failed to adequately warn users about the potential dangers of severe tooth decay and dental injuries associated with Suboxone’s sublingual film version.
Social Media Harm Lawsuits are being filed against social media companies for allegedly causing mental health issues in children and teens.
Claims allege that companies like Meta, Google, ByteDance, and Snap designed addictive platforms that led to anxiety, depression, and other mental health issues without adequately warning users or parents.
Transvaginal Mesh Lawsuits are being filed against manufacturers of transvaginal mesh products used to treat pelvic organ prolapse (POP) and stress urinary incontinence (SUI).
Claims allege that companies like Ethicon, C.R. Bard, and Boston Scientific failed to adequately warn about potential dangers — including erosion, pain, and infection.
Bair Hugger Warming Blanket Lawsuits involve claims against 3M — alleging their surgical warming blankets caused severe infections and complications (particularly in hip and knee replacement surgeries).
Plaintiffs claim 3M failed to warn about potential risks — despite knowing about increased risk of deep joint infections since 2011.
Baby Formula NEC Lawsuit claims are being filed against manufacturers of cow’s milk-based baby formula products.
Claims allege that companies like Abbott Laboratories (Similac) and Mead Johnson & Company (Enfamil) failed to warn about the increased risk of necrotizing enterocolitis (NEC) in premature infants.
Here, at TruLaw, we’re committed to helping victims get the justice they deserve.
Alongside our partner law firms, we have successfully collected over $3 Billion in verdicts and settlements on behalf of injured individuals.
Would you like our help?