Vaginal Mesh Lawsuit: Who Qualifies, Payouts, and Defendants

A vaginal mesh lawsuit can still be filed in 2026, now as an individual case in state court rather than through the federal multidistrict litigations, all seven of which have closed.¹ Current individual settlements generally run from $150,000 to $450,000, with severe cases involving multiple revision surgeries reaching $500,000 to $800,000 or more.² Across the full litigation, more than 100,000 claims have been filed against seven manufacturers, approximately 95% have been resolved, and manufacturers have paid an estimated $8 billion so far, with the true total higher because many agreements are confidential.

Who Can Still File a Claim

The binding question for most people considering a case now is the statute of limitations. Deadlines vary by state and are typically two to three years, with some states as short as one year, and they are strictly enforced. Most states apply a discovery rule: the clock starts when a patient discovers, or reasonably should have discovered, that the mesh is causing harm, not when it was implanted.¹ A woman implanted years ago who only recently learned her ongoing pain, erosion, or urinary symptoms trace to the device may still be inside her window.

Not everyone is eligible. Plaintiffs who have already settled a mesh claim cannot file again for the same injury. Claims involving devices made by American Medical Systems or Neomedic are also generally excluded, because that litigation is fully resolved.¹ Successful claims generally require medical records confirming the implant and the resulting complications, and most involve a plaintiff who has undergone surgery to remove the mesh.

What Vaginal Mesh Cases Are Worth Now

Case values changed substantially once the federal MDLs wound down. The mass settlements inside those proceedings produced low per-case averages: American Medical Systems settlements averaged roughly $40,000, Boston Scientific around $53,000, and Coloplast under $6,000.² C.R. Bard’s August 2015 round of roughly 3,000 cases for $200 million worked out to about $67,000 per case.³

Individual cases filed after the MDLs closed have trended higher, with current estimates in the $150,000 to $450,000 range and severe cases reaching $500,000 to $800,000 or more.² Jury verdicts, which represent a small share of outcomes but influence negotiations, have gone much higher. A Philadelphia jury awarded Susan McFarland $120 million in April 2019, including $100 million in punitive damages, after finding that Ethicon failed to warn about the dangers of its TVT-O mesh, which eroded tissue, punctured the plaintiff’s vagina, and caused chronic urinary tract infections.⁴ A separate Philadelphia jury awarded Patricia Mesigian $80 million in a Prolift case the following month.⁵ A Delaware jury awarded $100 million in May 2015 to a 51-year-old woman injured by Boston Scientific’s Pinnacle and Advantage Fit sling products.⁶ In 2025 the Eleventh Circuit upheld a $26.7 million verdict against Boston Scientific for four plaintiffs.

Settlements are generally structured in tiers based on the following:

Injury severity, with severe, lasting injuries and multiple revision surgeries placed in the top tiers.
Medical documentation tying the mesh to the injury, including imaging, surgical reports, and specialist records.
Number of revision surgeries, with more procedures corresponding to larger payouts.
Economic damages: past and future medical costs, lost wages, reduced earning capacity.
Non-economic damages: pain and suffering, sexual dysfunction, emotional distress, loss of quality of life.
Plaintiff age and the specific manufacturer involved, which affect projected care needs and settlement posture.

Individual settlement negotiations now typically take 6 to 18 months to complete.¹

Which Manufacturers Can Still Be Sued

Active state-court litigation continues against Johnson & Johnson’s Ethicon unit and C.R. Bard. In New Jersey, the Ethicon multicounty docket contained over 500 active cases as of April 2026, and the judge overseeing the Bard multicounty litigation extended discovery through June 2026.¹ Johnson & Johnson has spent more than $3.54 billion on mesh litigation to date, with the bulk occurring in 2013 and 2014.⁷ Boston Scientific has paid more than $400 million to resolve claims, including a $188.6 million multistate settlement in March 2021 with 47 states and the District of Columbia over allegations that the company misrepresented the safety of its products.⁸ Coloplast remains active in individual state cases; a Florida jury returned a $2.5 million verdict against Coloplast in Virginia Redding’s case in April 2022, upheld by the Eleventh Circuit in June 2024.²

Two defendants are off the table. American Medical Systems, owned by Endo International, resolved the largest number of cases of any manufacturer; after an $830 million settlement in 2014 covering roughly 20,000 lawsuits and a 2017 reserve of $775 million for approximately 22,000 additional claims, its mesh litigation is closed.⁹¹⁰ Neomedic, a Spanish device maker, resolved approximately 130 lawsuits for $2.19 million in December 2015.¹¹ Cook Medical’s MDL closed in 2019 after resolving 645 cases, with no aggregate figure made public.¹²

Injuries That Support a Claim

The FDA identified mesh erosion through the vaginal wall as the most frequently reported complication, with an average rate of about 2% at one year for stress urinary incontinence slings.¹³ Between 2005 and 2010, the agency received nearly 4,000 adverse event reports. In its 2011 safety communication, the FDA stated that serious complications from transvaginal mesh for prolapse repair were “not rare.”¹⁴ The complications most often documented in lawsuits include:

Mesh erosion, where the mesh cuts through vaginal tissue and sometimes becomes exposed, requiring surgical removal.
Chronic pelvic, groin, or leg pain that does not respond to treatment.
Organ perforation, with the mesh penetrating the bladder, bowel, or uterus.
Recurring infection and bleeding at the implant site.
Painful intercourse caused by exposed or contracted mesh.
New or worsened urinary incontinence, voiding dysfunction, or recurrent urinary tract infections.
Mesh contraction, leading to vaginal shortening and tightening.

In April 2019 the FDA ordered all manufacturers to stop selling and distributing transvaginal prolapse mesh immediately after determining that premarket approval data from Boston Scientific and Coloplast did not demonstrate reasonable assurance of safety and effectiveness. No surgical mesh products for transvaginal prolapse repair are currently approved for sale in the United States.¹⁵ Mid-urethral slings for stress urinary incontinence remain available; an FDA review in April 2024 found their safety and effectiveness comparable to traditional slings.¹³ A sling implant that functioned without complications typically does not support a claim.

Where the Litigation Stands

All seven federal multidistrict litigations, consolidated before U.S. District Judge Joseph R. Goodwin in the Southern District of West Virginia, have closed. Over 107,000 cases were filed across those proceedings, and more than 75,000 were resolved before the final MDL closed in 2021.¹ Remaining and new cases proceed in state courts.

One state-court ruling shapes how trials now unfold. In July 2023, the New Jersey Supreme Court decided the consolidated cases of Hrymoc v. Ethicon and McGinnis v. C.R. Bard and held that FDA 510(k) clearance evidence is generally inadmissible, because that process determines only that a device is “substantially equivalent” to a predicate device, not that it is safe and effective. When a plaintiff emphasizes a manufacturer’s failure to conduct clinical trials as evidence of unreasonableness, however, the manufacturer may introduce 510(k) clearance to explain its conduct.¹⁶

State attorneys general have continued to extract separate penalties for deceptive marketing. In February 2023 the U.S. Supreme Court declined to review a $302 million judgment against Johnson & Johnson obtained by California, making the penalty final; California had alleged over 150,000 violations of its Unfair Competition Law and False Advertising Law for misrepresenting the health risks of pelvic mesh.¹⁷ Those penalties go to the states, not to individual plaintiffs, but they signal continued legal exposure for the manufacturers that remain active defendants in private cases.

Outside the United States

Litigation outside the U.S. follows different tracks and is not available to U.S. plaintiffs. In August 2024, 140 women in England reached a settlement with Johnson & Johnson, Bard, and Boston Scientific in what was described as the first successful product liability group action in England for vaginal mesh complications; all three companies settled without admitting liability. Routine use of vaginal mesh had been paused in the UK in July 2018 after a government inquiry.¹⁸ The UK Patient Safety Commissioner estimated in 2024 that at least 10,000 women in England have been harmed, while campaign group Sling the Mesh puts the figure at roughly 40,000.¹⁹ As of March 2025 the UK government has said it is “carefully considering” the 2024 Hughes Report’s recommendation of a redress scheme but has not committed to one.²⁰ In Australia, a federal court approved a $105 million class-action settlement from Boston Scientific in March 2023.²

Steps to Take if You Think You Have a Case

Gather the medical records that establish the two anchors of a product liability claim: the implant itself and the harm it caused. That means the operative report from the original implant surgery (which identifies the manufacturer and specific device), records of the complications you’ve experienced, and any surgical records from a mesh removal or revision. Then contact an attorney who handles mesh cases, because the statute of limitations in your state controls whether the claim is viable at all, and discovery-rule questions turn on specific facts a lawyer will need to evaluate.¹

1
Drugwatch. Transvaginal Mesh Lawsuits
2
Drugwatch. Transvaginal Mesh Verdicts and Settlements
3
Waters Kraus & Paul. C.R. Bard Reaches $200 Million Transvaginal Mesh Settlement
4
Drugwatch. Philly Jury Awards $120 Million in Transvaginal Mesh Lawsuit
5
MedTech Dive. Philadelphia Jury Awards $80M in J&J Pelvic Mesh Suit
6
Medical Malpractice Lawyers. $100M Delaware Vaginal Mesh Verdict
7
The Sanders Firm. First Mesh Settlement for J&J Exceeds $120 Million
8
California Office of the Attorney General. California Department of Justice Announces $188.6 Million Multistate Settlement
9
The National Trial Lawyers. $830M Settlement Announced in 20,000 Transvaginal Mesh Cases
10
Bloomberg. Endo Sets Aside $775 Million to Settle Remaining Mesh Lawsuits
11
ClassAction.com. Transvaginal Mesh Settlements
12
U.S. District Court, Southern District of West Virginia. MDL 2440 Case Information
13
U.S. Food and Drug Administration. FDA Activities: Urogynecologic Surgical Mesh
14
National Library of Medicine. FDA Safety Communications on Transvaginal Mesh
15
U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Urogynecologic Surgical Mesh Implants
16
New Jersey Courts. Hrymoc v. Ethicon / McGinnis v. C.R. Bard, 257 N.J. 38 (2023)
17
California Office of the Attorney General. Attorney General Bonta Welcomes Supreme Court Decision Refusing Review of $302 Million Judgment
18
The Guardian. 140 Women in England Receive Compensation for Vaginal Mesh Implant Complications
19
UK Parliament Lords Library. Vaginal Mesh Implants: Financial Compensation
20
UK Parliament. Compensation for Those Harmed by Pelvic Mesh and Sodium Valproate