Can You Sue for a Failed Spinal Cord Stimulator? Yes — Here’s Exactly When, and How

Super Lawyers® 2014–2024CALL 24/7(888) 348-2735

Spinal Cord Stimulator — Free Case Review

Can you sue over a failed stimulator?

Honest answer: it depends on what happened next. Two minutes tells you.

ACTIVE LITIGATION — NO SETTLEMENT. MDL 3181 underway · deadlines vary by state.

Do you — or someone you love — have a spinal cord stimulator that caused problems?

Check if my case qualifiesfree · takes 2 minutes
I’m not sure it was the device →

No documents needed · an answer either way · no fee unless there is a recovery. Court costs and litigation expenses are advanced by counsel and repaid from the recovery. You are not responsible for court costs or litigation expenses if there is no recovery, unless a court directs otherwise. The attorney’s fee is a percentage of the gross recovery, calculated before expenses are deducted.

Or talk to a person now: (888) 348-2735 — answered 24/7

Stefanie A. Murphy & Matthew T. Marin

Partners

Every spinal cord stimulator inquiry gets a personal review — and an honest answer either way, free and without obligation.

Claims target the device manufacturers — not your doctor. Some matters may be referred to other lawyers. No settlement has been reached, and most cases are in their earliest stages; every case must be proven on its own facts. Attorney Advertising.

Yes — you can sue over a failed spinal cord stimulator when the failure resulted from a defective device, inadequate warnings, or misconduct in how it was sold and managed — and thousands of patients are doing exactly that, with federal Boston Scientific cases consolidated in MDL 3181 and Abbott/Nevro consolidation decisions expected in fall 2026. What a lawsuit requires is more than disappointment: it requires harm you can document. Here is the complete picture.

Marin & Murphy Law Firm is currently accepting spinal cord stimulator cases. Free, confidential case reviews: (888) 348-2735, available 24/7.

What qualifies — the fact patterns in active litigation

1. Revision, replacement, or removal surgery caused by device failure — the clearest path. 2. Hardware failure: lead migration or fracture on imaging, battery failure or overheating, charging faults. 3. Shocks, burns, and overstimulation injuries. 4. Infection requiring treatment or surgical removal. 5. Neurological injury — new weakness, numbness, paralysis, bowel or bladder dysfunction. 6. Sales-rep misconduct — reps programming devices or steering treatment without physician supervision. 7. Recalled devices (Abbott’s Class I MRI-mode recall) with any of the above. 8. Death following device complications — a wrongful-death claim for the family.

What doesn’t qualify by itself — and the trap in that sentence

“It just didn’t relieve my pain,” standing alone, generally isn’t compensable. But before you accept that description of your own case, ask: did the failure ever lead to a procedure — even an early battery replacement? Did anything happen besides not working — shocks, burning, charging problems, an abnormal X-ray? Most people who say “it just didn’t work” have more than that; they’ve just never itemized it.

The evidence a case is built on — all of it obtainable, and we do the obtaining

• Medical records tracking implant → complications → treatment
• operative reports for every procedure
• imaging showing hardware problems
• device interrogation logs
• the device ID card
• itemized bills and lost-income documentation
• the explanted device itself, if preserved.

Deadlines: the part that actually kills cases

Every state sets a limitations period — as short as one to two years in many — running from when you knew or should have known the device caused your injury. In July 2026 a federal court dismissed three of four stimulator plaintiffs as untimely. The deadline analysis is free, takes one call, and is the only question here that expires.

What it costs: nothing up front

These cases run on contingency — no fee unless there is a recovery, free case review, records obtained at no cost to you. And the claim targets the manufacturer — not your doctor, not your pain clinic.

Matthew T. Marin, J.D. — Admitted in Rhode Island, South Carolina, Connecticut, and Massachusetts

Stefanie A. Murphy, J.D. — Admitted in Rhode Island, Connecticut, and Massachusetts

Frequently Asked Questions

Attorney Advertising. This page is general information, not legal advice, and does not create an attorney-client relationship — that relationship is formed only by a signed written agreement. The attorneys of Marin & Murphy Law Firm are licensed in Rhode Island, South Carolina, Connecticut, and Massachusetts. We evaluate potential claims nationwide; for matters arising in states where our attorneys are not admitted, we associate with or refer to locally licensed co-counsel and do not ourselves practice law in those jurisdictions. Submitting the contact form or contacting the firm does not create an attorney-client relationship. Representation is offered on a contingent-fee basis: no fee unless there is a recovery, though a client may be responsible for case costs and expenses. The statute of limitations may sharply limit the time to file a claim. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome, and no outcome is guaranteed. Responsible attorney: Matthew T. Marin, Marin & Murphy Law Firm (South Carolina).