Every mass tort eventually settles on a range, and the range is built from bellwether verdicts. The Bard PowerPort MDL now has two, and they point in different directions. Understanding why is the most useful thing a prospective claimant can do right now.
The two cases
Cook — infection
Tried April–May 2026- Plaintiff became septic days after implant
- Defense verdict on warning and fraud claims
- Jury deadlocked on design defect
- New-trial motion pending
Divelbliss — fracture
Tried August–September 2026- Catheter fractured and migrated to the heart
- $40 million compensatory verdict
- Design defect and failure to warn found
- No punitive damages
Why the results differ
Everything starts with proving the device was a Bard PowerPort. Sources, in order of strength:
Causation is clearer in fracture cases. A broken catheter fragment in the heart on an X-ray is hard to attribute to anything but the device. Infection has more possible sources, and the defense leaned on that.
The design theory was tested directly. The barium sulfate degradation argument is about mechanical failure. The fracture trial put that theory squarely before the jury; the infection trial reached it only indirectly.
Damages were severe and specific. The fracture plaintiff alleged multiple heart attacks and emergency surgery. Compensatory awards track medical severity closely.
A $40 million verdict is not a settlement offer. It is one data point that increases pressure on the defense and raises the ceiling of what a settlement program must account for.
Direct2Attorney · Legal ExplainerWhat typically happens next
Three more bellwethers are scheduled — October 13, December 1, and February 2, 2027. As results accumulate, both sides gain a clearer picture of what juries do with each injury type. Settlement programs in comparable device litigation have used tiers: higher amounts for injuries requiring open-heart or emergency surgery, mid-range for removals and hospitalizations, lower for complications resolved with medication. Where the PowerPort program lands, if one is reached, will depend on the remaining trials.
What it means for an individual case
Your claim’s value depends on your injury, your treatment, your documentation, and your state’s law — not on the headline number. What the verdicts do change is leverage: firms evaluating new cases now have a plaintiff win to point to, and the defense has a reason to negotiate. That makes this a meaningful moment to have a case reviewed.
What this means if you're considering a claim
Fracture and migration injuries currently have the strongest verdict behind them; infection and thrombosis claims remain viable and are still being tried. If you had any of these complications from a Bard port, a free review can tell you how a participating firm sees your case in light of the current record.
Wondering where your case falls?
Free, confidential review by a participating firm.
Common Questions
Post-trial motions and appeals are standard. They can reduce or overturn verdicts but rarely change the litigation’s overall trajectory.
No. Any figures circulating online are projections. No settlement program exists yet.
Yes. Infection cases remain in the MDL and are scheduled for further trials.
Mass torts typically resolve over several years. The pace of bellwethers in this MDL is relatively fast.
No. Direct2Attorney’s review is free, and participating law firms typically work on contingency, meaning fees are generally paid only if there is a recovery. Confirm fee terms in writing with the firm.
