In re American Medical Systems, Inc.

Since 1973, American Medical Systems (AMS), a subsidiary of Pfizer (defendants), manufactured and marketed penile prostheses for treating impotence. In 1989 Paul Vorhis was implanted with an AMS penile prosthesis. In 1990 Vorhis underwent surgery to extend the length of his penis, which may have caused a subsequent leak in the input tube of his prosthesis. In 1993, after his first prosthesis failed to inflate, Vorhis had his device replaced with a different model. This model resulted in Vorhis experiencing pain and discomfort. Therefore, later that same year, Vorhis had the second prosthesis removed and replaced with a different model. Voorhees experienced no issues with the third prosthesis. In 1994 Vorhis filed a federal action against AMS individually and on behalf of others who had been implanted with AMS penile prostheses and suffered damages from the implant. Later-named plaintiffs asserted claims that their respective models of prostheses malfunctioned in a variety of ways for a variety of reasons. Soon thereafter, Vorhis filed a motion for class certification, and a hearing was held. AMS objected to Vorhis’s suitability to act as a representative of the class, arguing that because his need for prosthesis was due to a rare medical condition and because he had only experienced an issue with one out of the 10 types of prostheses AMS manufactured, he was unable to represent class members who experienced issues with other types. The trial court granted Vorhis’s motion and issued a class-certification order. AMS and Pfizer then petitioned the appellate court for a writ of mandamus instructing the trial court to vacate its certification order.