Have there been any cases involving Bair Hugger blankets?

Have There Been Any Cases Involving Bair Hugger Blankets?

Have there been any cases involving Bair Hugger blankets? There have been numerous lawsuits filed related to the use of Bair Hugger blankets. As noted above, many of them have been consolidated into an MDL proceeding. However, that does not mean that they lose their individual identities. Therefore, here is an outline of some of them:

Case Name: JAMES RHOTON, et al, Plaintiffs, v. 3M Company, et al., Defendants.
Jurisdiction: ALABAMA
Year: 2015
Injury Type: MRSA INFECTION

The plaintiff in this Alabama case had implant surgery where the doctors used a Bair Hugger blanket. Approximately six months later, she developed a MRSA infection. She sued the makers of the blanket, Arizant, and claimed that the device sucked germs from the floor into the site wound. She claimed various damages under multiple theories.

Case Name: ROME V. 3M COMPANY AND ARIZANT HEALTHCARE INC.
Jurisdiction: MINNESOTA
Year: 2015
Injury Type: LEG INJURY

Patricia Rome underwent total knee arthroplasty surgery but suffered an extraordinary infection in the course of it. She attributed it to the physicians’ use of a Bair Hugger blanket. According to her complaint, the damage was great. She needed successive surgeries to take out the original knee implant, sanitize the area in focus, and remove dead tissue. She still experiences significant pain and difficulty walking. She sued the Bair Hugger’s makers for compensation for these injuries as well as for the related medical bills and lost wages.

Case Name: JOHNSON v. 3M COMPANY
Jurisdiction: KANSAS
Year: 2014
Injury Type: KNEE INJURY

The patient in this case underwent knee surgery and in the course of the procedure his doctors utilized a Bair Hugger blanket to keep his body warm. Unfortunately, according to the plaintiff, he also received a periprosthetic infection as well as the intended warmth due to the use of the medical device. He sued its makers, 3M/Arizant, for various damages related to medical bills, pain and suffering, and other non-economic harms.

Case Name: Walton v. 3M Co.
Jurisdiction: TEXAS
Year: 2013
Injury Type: GENERAL INFECTION

The victim in this case filed a products liability case in a Texas court. The man contended that the anesthesiologist involved in his operation allowed germs and other contaminants to enter his wound site and injure him. From this injury, he claimed subsequent damages and thought it was the responsibility of the blanket’s manufacturer to pay for them.

Case Name: James JINDRICH v. 3M COMPANY AND ARIZANT HEALTHCARE, INC.
Jurisdiction: ILLINOIS
Year: 2015
Injury Type: AMPUTATION

The patient in this dispute claimed that the medical professionals treating him during a knee replacement surgery allowed bacteria to infect his would through the use of a Bair Hugger blanket. Due to this complication, he had to have his leg amputated, incur extraordinary medical bills, and live with constant and significant pain and suffering. He filed a lawsuit and identified the makers of the blanket as culpable under a theory of products liability.

Case Name: MELVIN PETERSON v. 3M COMPANY
Jurisdiction: MINNESOTA
Year: 2015
Injury Type: MRSA INFECTION

This controversy began when Melvin Peterson underwent hip surgery. The doctors supposedly followed all relevant rules and procedures, which called for the use of a Bair Hugger. Apparently, they did not do everything right though because a few months later he developed a MRSA infection and need two more surgeries to fix the issue. Even today, the complication left him in a wheelchair as well as with steep medical bills. He sued the manufacturers to recover for these losses.

These are just a select group of cases. There are many more Bair Hugger lawsuits being filed all over the country and there will be more to come in the future. Here is a list of some others that you can read about:

ARKANSAS – EDWARDS v. 3M COMPANY

MINNESOTA - LICHLYTER v. 3M COMPANY

MINNESOTA - NAYLOR v. 3M COMPANY

MINNESOTA - NOTTINGHAM v. 3M COMPANY

MINNESOTA - SCHACKMANN v. 3M COMPANY

MINNESOTA - REED v. 3M COMPANY

OHIO – KENT v. 3M COMPANY

For additional information, see the following pages:

Back to the Top

Client Reviews
Jonathan Rosenfeld was professionally objective, timely, and knowledgeable. Also, his advice was extremely effective regarding my case. In addition, Jonathan was understanding and patient pertaining to any of my questions or concerns. I was very happy with the end result and I highly recommend Jonathan Rosenfeld.
★★★★★
Extremely impressed with this law firm. They took control of a bad motorcycle crash that left my uncle seriously injured. Without any guarantee of a financial recovery, they went out and hired accident investigators and engineers to help prove how the accident happened. I am grateful that they worked on a contingency fee basis as there was no way we could have paid for these services on our own. Ethan Armstrong, Google User
★★★★★
This lawyer really helped me get compensation for my motorcycle accident case. I know there is no way that I could have gotten anywhere near the amount that Mr. Rosenfeld was able to get to settle my case. Thank you. Daniel Kaim, Avvo User
★★★★★
Jonathan helped my family heal and get compensation after our child was suffered a life threatening injury at daycare. He was sympathetic and in constant contact with us letting us know all he knew every step of the way. We were so blessed to find Jonathan! Giulia, Avvo User
★★★★★
Jonathan did a great job helping my family navigate through a lengthy lawsuit involving my grandmother's death in a nursing home. Through every step of the case, Jonathan kept my family informed of the progression of the case. Although our case eventually settled at a mediation, I really was impressed at how well prepared Jonathan was to take the case to trial. Lisa, Avvo User
★★★★★
Contact Us for a Free Consultation (888) 424-5757
Chicago Office Map