Our firm is about people. That is our motto and that will always be our reality.
We do our best to get to know our clients, understand their situations, and get them the compensation they deserve.
At TorHoerman Law, we believe that if we continue to focus on the people that we represent, and continue to be true to the people that we are – justice will always be served.
Without our team, we would’nt be able to provide our clients with anything close to the level of service they receive when they work with us.
The TorHoerman Law Team commits to the sincere belief that those injured by the misconduct of others, especially large corporate profit mongers, deserve justice for their injuries.
Our team is what has made TorHoerman Law a very special place since 2009.
Boston Scientific spinal cord stimulator lawsuit claims center on allegations that certain spinal cord stimulation devices may have malfunctioned, failed, or caused patients to experience serious complications after implantation.
Patients who suffered complications from a defective spinal cord stimulator may pursue a spinal cord stimulator lawsuit against medical device manufacturers to seek compensation for injuries and related medical costs.
TorHoerman Law is reviewing claims involving injuries linked to spinal stimulator devices.
Spinal cord stimulators are implantable devices used to treat chronic pain that has not responded to medication, physical therapy, or other pain management treatments.
Spinal cord stimulators work to provide mild electrical impulses to the spinal cord that can mask or modify pain signals before they reach the brain.
Spinal cord stimulation systems use thin electrodes positioned in the epidural space near the spinal cord.
These electrodes connect to an implantable pulse generator, a small device implanted under the skin that controls stimulation delivered near the spinal nerve root.
Many patients who received a spinal cord stimulator implanted to treat chronic pain expected meaningful pain relief.
However, some individuals report device malfunction, electrical shocks, worsening pain, or ineffective pain relief following implantation.
Spinal cord stimulator devices have been reported to cause serious injuries and complications including lead migration, loss of stimulation, painful electrical shocks, battery or charging problems, infection, and revision or explant surgery.
Spinal cord stimulator lawsuits allege that manufacturers failed to conduct adequate safety testing and to provide necessary warnings, leaving patients vulnerable to severe injuries.
Some patients report experiencing electrical shocks, nerve damage, or worsening pain symptoms after spinal cord stimulator placement.
In certain cases, individuals have undergone additional surgery to remove or replace the implanted device.
TorHoerman Law is reviewing claims involving injuries allegedly linked to Boston Scientific spinal cord stimulator devices.
If you or a loved one suffered complications or injuries related to a Boston Scientific spinal cord stimulator device, you may be eligible to file a defective medical device lawsuit.
Contact TorHoerman Law for a free consultation.
You can also use the chat feature on this page to find out if you qualify for a spinal cord stimulator lawsuit.
Boston Scientific has been named in recently reported spinal cord stimulator lawsuits involving allegations that certain implanted devices caused complications after implantation.
Several complaints describe situations in which patients received a spinal cord stimulator implanted to manage chronic pain but later reported new problems with the device.
Allegations in these spinal cord stimulator lawsuits include lead migration, erratic stimulation, battery-related malfunction, and worsening pain after implantation.
In some cases, patients claim the device no longer delivered reliable stimulation or produced uncomfortable electrical sensations.
These reports appear in ongoing spinal cord stimulator litigation, where plaintiffs allege that the implanted device did not perform as expected and required corrective procedures or removal.
Plaintiffs have asked for certain spinal cord stimulator lawsuits involving Boston Scientific and Abbott to be handled together because the cases raise similar allegations involving lead problems, stimulation issues, and revision surgeries.

In February 2026, plaintiffs filed a motion requesting the creation of a multidistrict litigation (MDL) involving spinal cord stimulator lawsuits against Boston Scientific and other manufacturers.
This motion was accepted by the JPML, and in June 2026, the Boston Scientific spinal cord stimulator MDL was officially created.
The MDL seeks to coordinate federal cases that raise similar allegations involving lead migration, painful stimulation changes, autonomic dysfunction, neurological injury, and revision surgeries following spinal cord stimulator implantation.
These spinal cord stimulator cases remain ongoing, and no court has issued a final ruling establishing liability or approving a global settlement.
Recent court filings show that Boston Scientific Corporation and Boston Scientific Neuromodulation Corporation have been named in spinal cord stimulator lawsuits alleging device malfunction, lead migration, painful stimulation changes, and other complications following implantation.
These complaints are often framed as product liability lawsuits and defective medical device lawsuits involving medical devices implanted to treat chronic pain, where plaintiffs allege that the device was not reasonably safe for its intended use.
Several lawsuits describe patients who underwent implantation surgery but later experienced worsening pain, erratic electrical stimulation, and procedures to remove or revise the system.
Plaintiffs allege that some modern spinal cord stimulators, including rechargeable spinal cord stimulators, malfunctioned after implantation or required corrective surgery.
Boston Scientific manufactures spinal cord stimulation systems used to treat chronic nerve pain when other therapies have not provided adequate relief.
These implantable neuromodulation devices deliver electrical impulses near the spinal cord to modify pain signals before they reach the brain.
Patients typically undergo a temporary stimulation trial before permanent implantation.
Physicians evaluate whether stimulation produces measurable pain relief before proceeding with spinal cord stimulator surgery.

Boston Scientific spinal cord stimulation systems commonly referenced in medical records include include traditional and burst stimulation devices such as:
Some of these systems are marketed with MRI-conditional labeling depending on the pulse generator model and lead configuration used during implantation.
Patients who received a Boston Scientific spinal cord stimulator implanted and later developed serious complications may be able to pursue a claim.
Many spinal cord stimulator lawsuits involve situations where a device used to treat chronic pain later caused device malfunction, worsening symptoms, or injuries that required additional medical care.
Reported circumstances in spinal cord stimulator cases often include device failure, electrical shocks, lead migration, infection, or revision procedures after spinal cord stimulator implantation.

If a Boston Scientific spinal cord stimulator caused serious complications, the process of determining whether a claim may proceed generally involves several steps:
After these initial steps, the claim may proceed through the process of a product liability claim, beginning with the filing of a complaint setting out the alleged defect and resulting harm.
The case then moves through pleadings and pre-trial proceedings, where the parties address legal issues and may engage in settlement discussions.
If the matter is not resolved, it may proceed to trial, where the court evaluates liability and any damages based on the record.
A Boston Scientific spinal cord stimulator lawsuit often begins with collecting records that identify the implanted device and document what changed after spinal cord stimulator implantation.
Device identification plays a key role in evaluating a Boston Scientific spinal cord stimulator lawsuit. Surgical records and implant cards usually list the exact spinal cord stimulator device, including the model name, serial number, and the implantable pulse generator used during spinal cord stimulator implantation.
Those details help determine whether the implanted system was a Boston Scientific spinal cord stimulation device, such as WaveWriter Alpha, Spectra WaveWriter, WaveWriter, or WaveWriter Alpha Prime, and which leads or components were placed near the spinal cord during the procedure.

Types of personal injury evidence commonly collected in spinal cord stimulator cases include:
These records help identify the specific Boston Scientific spinal cord stimulation device and document whether device malfunction or spinal cord stimulator complications developed after implantation.
A Boston Scientific spinal cord stimulator lawsuit often addresses the medical and financial consequences that follow spinal cord stimulator complications.
Some patients undergo additional procedures after spinal cord stimulator implantation, while others continue treatment for symptoms such as worsening pain, electrical shocks, or loss of stimulation.
Medical records in spinal cord stimulator lawsuits may show repeat treatment after the device was implanted to treat chronic pain.
In some situations, the spinal cord stimulator implanted during the original procedure must be revised or removed through additional spinal cord stimulator surgery.

Damages in spinal cord stimulator cases often involve:
The potential value of a spinal cord stimulator lawsuit depends on the specific facts of the case, including the device involved, the severity of the injury, additional procedures required, and the lasting impact on daily life.
No result or compensation amount can be guaranteed.
Compensation in spinal cord stimulator lawsuits may cover both direct medical costs and broader impacts on a person’s quality of life and earning capacity.
Many people who pursue these claims have already undergone multiple medical appointments, additional treatment, or corrective surgery after problems with the implanted device.

Several factors may influence the average settlement in spinal cord stimulator cases, including:
Patients who experience severe complications from spinal cord stimulators may seek compensation for pain and suffering, lost wages, and long-term disability.
Higher potential spinal stimulator settlement amounts are often associated with cases involving multiple revision surgeries or complete explantation of the device.
Recent lawsuits and court filings describe allegations that some Boston Scientific spinal cord stimulators malfunctioned after implantation, leading to complications such as lead migration, painful stimulation changes, and additional surgery to revise or remove the device.
Plaintiffs in these cases claim the devices failed to perform as intended or caused injuries after implantation.
TorHoerman Law is actively reviewing claims from individuals who received Boston Scientific spinal cord stimulators and later experienced serious complications, device failure, or revision or explant surgery.
Our legal team examines medical records, device information, and treatment history to determine whether a spinal cord stimulator lawsuit may be appropriate.

If you received a Boston Scientific spinal cord stimulator and later experienced severe complications or corrective surgery, contact TorHoerman Law for a free case review.
Our law firm can evaluate your records and discuss whether legal options may be available based on the circumstances of your case.
Patients are filing these cases because some people allege that they suffered a spinal cord stimulator injury after implantation and later experienced serious complications such as electric shocks, nerve damage, device migration, burns, lead fracture or displacement, battery malfunction, infection, and other neurological problems, including allegations involving spinal cord injuries.
Lawsuits in this area of medical device litigation usually seek compensation for medical costs, emotional distress, and other damages, while also attempting to hold spinal cord stimulator manufacturers accountable for how these products were designed, tested, marketed, and monitored within the broader medical device industry.
Many of these claims also focus on whether manufacturers complied not just with the technical requirements of the regulatory system, but with its underlying safety purpose, especially given the volume of reported problems.
Public reporting based on FDA data describing well over 80,000 adverse event reports tied to spinal cord stimulators.
Several Boston Scientific spinal cord stimulation systems have been referenced in spinal cord stimulator lawsuits involving reported device malfunction, lead migration, or other spinal cord stimulator complications.
Models that may be identified in these spinal cord stimulator cases include:
The specific spinal cord stimulator implanted during the implantation procedure is important.
Surgical records and medical records usually identify the model and components used, which helps determine whether one of these Boston Scientific spinal cord stimulation devices is involved.
Yes.
In 2024 the FDA posted a Class II recall involving certain Boston Scientific WaveWriter Alpha implantable pulse generator kits, which are part of spinal cord stimulation systems used to treat chronic pain.
Reported effects associated with the issue included temporary loss of stimulation or inadequate pain relief, unexpected stimulation changes, and electrical shocks or uncomfortable sensations.
The recall applied to specific components used during spinal cord stimulator implantation, and patients were advised to consult their physician if symptoms occurred.
Reports in spinal cord stimulator lawsuits and safety databases describe several problems involving certain spinal cord stimulation devices.
Some patients state that the spinal cord stimulator implanted to help manage chronic pain later stopped providing effective pain relief or caused new symptoms.
Complaints described in spinal cord stimulator cases often involve changes in stimulation affecting the spinal cord or problems with device components.
Reported issues include:
Some patients also report nerve damage, continued chronic nerve pain, or other serious complications after spinal cord stimulator surgery.
Revision or removal of a spinal cord stimulator implanted during spinal cord stimulator surgery can be an important fact in spinal cord stimulator lawsuits.
Some spinal cord stimulator cases involve patients who needed another procedure after the original spinal cord stimulator implantation.
Situations that may appear in a cord stimulator lawsuit include:
When medical records show these events, the claim may be evaluated as a defective medical device case within broader spinal cord stimulator litigation.
Spinal cord stimulators are used to help alleviate chronic pain when more conservative treatment has not provided enough relief.
Boston Scientific’s approved SCS systems are indicated as an aid in managing chronic, intractable pain of the trunk or limbs, including pain associated with complex regional pain syndrome, failed back or surgery syndrome, and chronic low back and leg pain.
SCS devices may be used for:
Owner & Attorney - TorHoerman Law
Here, at TorHoerman Law, we’re committed to helping victims get the justice they deserve.
Since 2009, we have successfully collected over $4 Billion in verdicts and settlements on behalf of injured individuals.
Would you like our help?
At TorHoerman Law, we believe that if we continue to focus on the people that we represent, and continue to be true to the people that we are – justice will always be served.
Do you believe you’re entitled to compensation?
Use our Instant Case Evaluator to find out in as little as 60 seconds!
In this case, we obtained a verdict of $495 Million for our client’s child who was diagnosed with Necrotizing Enterocolitis after consuming baby formula manufactured by Abbott Laboratories.
In this case, we were able to successfully recover $20 Million for our client after they suffered a Toxic Tort Injury due to chemical exposure.
In this case, we were able to successfully recover $103.8 Million for our client after they suffered a COX-2 Inhibitors Injury.
In this case, we were able to successfully recover $4 Million for our client after they suffered a Traumatic Brain Injury while at daycare.
In this case, we were able to successfully recover $2.8 Million for our client after they suffered an injury due to a Defective Heart Device.
Here, at TorHoerman Law, we’re committed to helping victims get the justice they deserve.
Since 2009, we have successfully collected over $4 Billion in verdicts and settlements on behalf of injured individuals.
Would you like our help?