Case Stats

  • This gives referring lawyers and the outside world the exact same information we use in-house for quality control. Intakes need to be accepted / declined and cases need to be resolved! Justice delayed is justice denied.
  • 2019 Total Intake Contacts 468    (as of 8/1)
  • 2019 Total Intakes Declined 369 (as of 8/1)
  • All Intakes Under Investigation 47 (as of 8/1)
  • 2019 Accepted/Filed Cases 12 
  • Total Pending Cases 159 
  • Referred Cases from other lawyers state and nationwide 94%
  • Median Time First Contact to Decline 25 days (most cases are reviewed w/ an indication of merit within 72 hours)
  • Median Time First Contact to Accepted/Filed Cases 9 weeks
  • Median Time Case Filing to Resolution 1.8 years

Boehringer, et. al. v. Smith & Nephew, Inc., et. al. (Waterbury Superior Court—filed April 30, 2018)  On July 20, 2010, our client received a bilateral hip replacement with products designed, manufactured, and sold by Smith & Nephew, Inc., and implanted by John M. Keggi of Orthopaedics New England, P.C.  Less than a year later, Dr. Keggi informed the plaintiff that Smith & Nephew instituted a recall of the hip liners used during surgery due to the product’s failure to conform to manufacturing specifications. Several batches of the liners had been subjected to no or very poor quality control by the manufacturer, permitting titanium rings to be applied improperly in violation of FDA specifications, making the parts very risky for fatigue fracture. Although the liners implanted in the plaintiff were subject of this recall, Keggi told our client that revision was unnecessary as the part should “continue to function well… with the same durability as those not affected by the recall” and assured the plaintiff “no change [was] recommended in [his] level of activity.”  In 2017, while walking his dogs, the plaintiff experienced “clicking” sensations in his right hip followed by very sharp pain that only worsened over the next two weeks. A subsequent CT scan revealed a catastrophic complete fracture of the right hip liner. The plaintiff was forced to undergo a total hip revision surgery, performed by Keggi, where he confirmed intraoperatively that the Smith & Nephew right hip liner had broken into two pieces. Our plaintiff continues to experience “squeaking” and pain in his left hip and will likely require total hip revision on the other side in the near future due to a similar failure of the product manufactured and distributed by Smith & Nephew. Because the defendant—who profited from the sale and distribution of these adulterated and defective products—misrepresented them as “safe to use,” the plaintiff has more surgery, more associated risks, more medical expenses, and more pain and disability to contend with in his future. He can no longer enjoy his everyday activities, and has suffered a loss of income and quality of life.  Keggi, the co-defendant in this case, was also a defendant in a product liability case we handled in 2011 involving another catastrophic ceramic hip explosion. He had assured that plaintiff, a MLB umpire, that he was given “the Rolls Royce of artificial hips” just one month before it shattered, ending his career. Much to the umpire’s chagrin, Keggi’s endorsement of the poorly manufactured Wright Medical hip was an error.

How to Use Case Builder

Case Builder contains two helpful categories: cases we are working on now and our past results. Case Builder is a novel concept. Our web designer said we should have this information fixed in a web page. We disagreed—thinking that just like our practice is always changing the case builder should be an ever-changing description of where we are right now—not last month or a year ago.

Current Cases

Past Results

National Board of Trial Advocacy

US News Best Law Firms 2017

Super Lawyers Top 50 New England Lawyers

Super Lawyers Top 10 Connecticut Lawyers

Martin Hubbell Peer Review Rated

CLTA Board of Govenors