Products Liability Law Reporter

A federal district court held that a patient’s suit against the manufacturer of the Paragard IUD was time-barred under Louisiana law.

Beyuka Cowart Stewart had a Paragard IUD inserted without complications. Shortly after, however, she began experiencing painful cramping, bleeding, and mood swings. Approximately two-and-a-half years later, she learned she was pregnant and underwent an ultrasound, which showed the IUD was embedded in her cervix. By Jan. 24, 2022, a specialist attempted unsuccessfully to remove the IUD. Within two weeks, Stewart miscarried.

Exactly one year later, she sued manufacturer CooperSurgical Inc., alleging the IUD was defective and lacked adequate warnings. The defense removed the case to federal court and moved for summary judgment, arguing that the plaintiff’s claims were prescribed under the Louisiana Products Liability Act (LPLA). The defense argued that the plaintiff’s claims were subject to a one-year prescriptive period and had expired on Jan. 23, 2023, at the latest.

Granting the motion, the court noted that under the LPLA, the prescriptive period begins to run from the day of injury. Here, the court said, the plaintiff had constructive notice by Jan. 23, 2022, of her potential claims against CooperSurgical. It was then that she became aware of the connection between her pain and the IUD, and the fact that the medical device had not performed as intended. The court added that the plaintiff’s deposition testimony—in which she explained that by mid-January, she had been informed by doctors of the IUD’s connection to her excruciating pain and the fact that the device was embedded in her cervix—supported its conclusion.

Finding that the plaintiff’s February 2023 suit was commenced after the one-year prescriptive period, the court concluded dismissal with prejudice was warranted.

Citation: Stewart v. CooperSurgical Inc., 2024 WL 3553588 (E.D. La. July 25, 2024).