Florida Defective Medical Device Lawyer — Recalled Implant & Device Attorneys
Free consultation · No fee unless we win · 24/7 · English · Spanish · Portuguese · Creole
Why Choose Our Florida Defective Medical Device Lawyer
The device was supposed to save your life, restore your mobility, or let you sleep through the night. The hip implant was supposed to last two decades. The CPAP was supposed to treat sleep apnea without giving you cancer. The breast implant was supposed to be cosmetic, not oncologic. The hernia mesh was supposed to heal you, not cause bowel perforation. The IVC filter was supposed to prevent pulmonary embolism, not fracture into migrating metal shards.
Then it failed. And the revision surgery, the chemotherapy, the explant procedure, the emergency laparotomy — none of them were supposed to be part of your life.
Sky Law Firm represents Florida victims of defective and recalled medical devices. This is one of the most technically demanding areas of personal injury practice, and one of the most financially rewarding when the case is built correctly. These are Class II and Class III medical devices regulated (and often not regulated well enough) by the FDA, implanted in your body by a surgeon who relied on the manufacturer’s representations, and marketed to physicians by sales representatives compensated on volume rather than outcomes.
Attorney Andrew Sky and the firm’s medical device team bring the specific litigation experience these cases require: MDL filing discipline, expert budgets in six figures, sophistication with FDA 510(k) clearance records and premarket approval files, and — critically — fluency with the federal preemption doctrine from Riegel v. Medtronic, Inc., 552 U.S. 312 (2008), which can bar state-law claims against PMA-approved Class III devices unless the case is framed correctly.
Call (305) 320-4529 or 1-844-OUCH-844 for a free, confidential consultation.
Proven Results in Florida Device Cases
Representative outcomes. Every case is different. Past results do not guarantee future outcomes.
- $2.8 million — Philips CPAP / BiPAP case. Long-term user of recalled DreamStation device developed biopsy-confirmed laryngeal cancer following years of inhalation of degraded PE-PUR sound-abatement foam particles and off-gassed volatile organic compounds.
- $2.1 million — BIA-ALCL breast implant case. Textured saline implant patient developed breast implant-associated anaplastic large cell lymphoma; explant, capsulectomy, and chemotherapy. Resolved through manufacturer settlement program.
- $1.45 million — DePuy ASR metal-on-metal hip implant revision case. Cobalt and chromium ion elevation on serum metal panel; metallosis confirmed at revision surgery; acetabular component loosening.
- $1.1 million — Ethicon Physiomesh hernia mesh case. Bowel adhesion, small bowel obstruction requiring lysis of adhesions and partial mesh explantation. Resolved through MDL inventory settlement.
- $780,000 — Bard IVC filter fracture case. Strut migration to right atrium; open cardiac retrieval procedure at a Florida tertiary referral center.
- $560,000 — Stryker Rejuvenate modular hip implant revision case with taper corrosion and pseudotumor formation.
- $420,000 — Exactech Optetrak knee implant recall case with early revision for component loosening.
Compensation Available in a Florida Defective Medical Device Case
Defective medical device cases are built around three layers of damages:
Past and future medical expenses — the cost of the initial failed implant (which the client already paid or for which the client’s insurer has a subrogation lien), the revision or explant surgery, hospitalization, physical therapy and rehabilitation, replacement device, follow-up imaging (serial X-ray, CT, MRI, ultrasound), and lifetime specialist follow-up for complications.
Lost wages and lost earning capacity — particularly significant when the device failure occurs in a working-age person who now faces permanent functional limitations (a hip revision patient who cannot return to a construction job, a mesh patient who can no longer tolerate the physical demands of healthcare work, a CPAP patient whose chronic pulmonary injury limits activity tolerance).
Non-economic damages — pain and suffering, mental anguish, disfigurement and scarring from multiple surgeries, loss of enjoyment of life, loss of consortium for the spouse.
Punitive damages are available under Florida Statute § 768.72 when the plaintiff proves by clear and convincing evidence that the manufacturer engaged in gross negligence or intentional misconduct. Device cases that survive preemption often do so because the manufacturer failed to comply with a PMA supplement, failed to report adverse events to the FDA, or misrepresented safety data — all facts that also support punitive recovery.
Wrongful death under Florida Statutes § 768.16–768.26 when the device failure results in death (CPAP-related lung cancer, hip implant revision mortality, mesh-related sepsis, IVC filter-induced cardiac arrest, breast implant lymphoma mortality).
Factors That Influence the Value of a Florida Defective Medical Device Case
Class II vs. Class III FDA classification. Class III devices approved through the Premarket Approval (PMA) process are subject to federal preemption under Riegel v. Medtronic. State-law claims against PMA devices are generally barred unless the case is framed as a “parallel claim” — a state-law cause of action that parallels a federal requirement the manufacturer violated. Class II devices cleared through the 510(k) pathway are not subject to Riegel preemption and are generally fully available for state-law tort claims.
Device identification and serial number. Every implanted device has a serial or lot number. The sticker is typically placed in the patient’s medical record at the time of implant. Recovery requires matching the specific device to the specific recall or litigation pool.
The recall notice and FDA classification. Class I recalls (high risk of serious injury or death) generate the strongest cases. Class II and Class III recalls are still viable but require more nuanced causation work.
Proof of injury causation. A failed hip implant requires evidence of metallosis, pseudotumor, or component loosening at revision. A failed mesh requires evidence of adhesion, erosion, or infection. A failed CPAP requires evidence of respiratory disease or cancer with a plausible exposure pathway to the degraded foam.
Florida Statute § 95.031(2)(b) — the 12-year statute of repose. Most medical devices are designed for longer than 10-year useful life and may fall outside the 12-year cap, but the analysis is fact-specific. Fraud and concealment exceptions frequently apply to device cases.
The MDL settlement matrix tier. Most device MDLs resolve through tiered settlement matrices. Tier placement is driven by severity, revision status, and residual impairment.
Florida Defective Medical Device FAQ
1. What is the Philips CPAP recall? In June 2021, Philips Respironics recalled millions of CPAP, BiPAP, and ventilator devices (DreamStation, DreamStation Go, SystemOne, and others) because the polyester-based polyurethane (PE-PUR) sound-abatement foam was degrading and releasing particles and volatile organic compounds directly into the patient’s airway. The recall remains open through 2026 with ongoing remediation programs. Alleged injuries: lung cancer, laryngeal cancer, nasopharyngeal cancer, kidney cancer, liver cancer, severe respiratory disease, and pulmonary fibrosis. MDL 3014 is pending in the Western District of Pennsylvania. This is a very high-volume active mass tort, and Sky Law Firm is actively intaking cases.
2. What is BIA-ALCL and which breast implants cause it? BIA-ALCL is breast implant-associated anaplastic large cell lymphoma — a T-cell lymphoma of the capsule surrounding a textured breast implant. The FDA has linked BIA-ALCL primarily to textured-surface implants from Allergan (the BIOCELL line, recalled in 2019) and to a lesser extent certain Mentor and Sientra textured implants. Presentation is typically 7–10 years after implantation, with unilateral seroma and capsular mass. Treatment: explant, total capsulectomy, and often chemotherapy. Claims are being handled through individual litigation and Allergan settlement programs.
3. Which hip implants are in active litigation? Multiple. DePuy ASR XL Acetabular System (recalled 2010, metal-on-metal metallosis). DePuy Pinnacle (metal-on-metal, bellwether trials concluded). Stryker Rejuvenate and ABG II modular-neck hips (taper corrosion at the neck-stem junction, recalled 2012). Zimmer Durom Cup (recalled). Exactech Connexion GXL acetabular liners (polyethylene oxidation, recalled 2021). Smith & Nephew BHR (metal-on-metal). If you had a hip revision or are scheduled for one, call us to identify which manufacturer and which device are involved.
4. Which knee implants are in litigation? Exactech Optetrak, Truliant, and Vantage knees are the subject of the 2022 recall involving defective tibial inserts and cobalt-chromium backed components. Zimmer NexGen CR-Flex and LPS-Flex knees have seen product liability claims for premature loosening. Arthrex iBalance and some DePuy Attune components have generated claims.
5. What is hernia mesh litigation? Multiple ongoing MDLs against Ethicon (Physiomesh — MDL 2782, N.D. Ga.), Bard (Davol Ventralight, Ventralex, 3DMax, Composix — MDL 2846, S.D. Ohio), Atrium (C-Qur — MDL 2753, D.N.H.), and Covidien (Parietex). Injuries: adhesion, bowel obstruction, erosion, infection, chronic pain, recurrence requiring mesh explantation and redo hernia repair.
6. What is an IVC filter and what went wrong? Inferior vena cava filters are umbrella-shaped devices implanted in the large vein returning blood from the lower body to the heart, intended to catch blood clots before they reach the lungs. Retrievable filters from Bard (Recovery, G2, Eclipse, Meridian, Denali) and Cook Medical (Celect, Gunther Tulip) have fractured, migrated, perforated the vena cava, embedded in cardiac tissue, and caused strokes and cardiac tamponade. MDL 2570 (Cook) and MDL 2641 (Bard) are active, with substantial settlements reached.
7. What is Riegel v. Medtronic preemption and does it bar my claim? Riegel v. Medtronic, Inc., 552 U.S. 312 (2008), held that the Medical Device Amendments of 1976 expressly preempt state-law tort claims against Class III medical devices that received FDA premarket approval (PMA), to the extent those state-law claims impose requirements different from or additional to federal requirements. Preemption can be defeated by a “parallel claim” theory — alleging that the manufacturer violated a specific federal requirement, and the state-law claim merely enforces that same requirement. Class II 510(k) devices are not subject to Riegel preemption. This analysis is case-specific and is the single most important doctrinal question in most Class III device cases.
8. My surgeon told me the device is “out of my body” so I should be fine. Is the case over? No. Even after explantation, you may have claims for the revision surgery itself, for complications of the original implant, for future surveillance, and for permanent impairment. Explant is often the beginning of the case, not the end.
9. What is the Florida statute of limitations for a medical device case? Two years from discovery of the injury and its causation for claims accruing after March 24, 2023 (HB 837). Four years for earlier claims. Florida’s 12-year statute of repose under § 95.031(2)(b) applies, but fraud, concealment, and latent injury exceptions usually preserve device claims.
10. I still have the implant in my body. Should I have it removed? That is a medical decision, not a legal one. Your surgeon and treating specialists decide whether and when revision or explant is medically indicated. Filing a lawsuit does not require removal. Many plaintiffs maintain the device in place under surveillance while the case proceeds.
Why Work with Sky Law Firm for a Florida Defective Medical Device Case
Device litigation is not a practice area that rewards occasional attention. The body of law is specialized (Riegel preemption, Wyeth v. Levine, Buckman v. Plaintiffs’ Legal Committee, the full line of PMA and 510(k) doctrine). The expert networks are specific (orthopedic revision surgeons, pulmonologists, pathologists, regulatory affairs consultants, biomechanical engineers, materials scientists). The document production is enormous (PMA files, 510(k) submissions, FDA 483s, warning letters, CAPAs, device-specific adverse event reports).
Sky Law Firm treats medical device work as a core practice. Andrew Sky and the device team carry active files across the major currently litigated products. We co-counsel with plaintiffs’ steering committee members on MDL strategy. We attend the status conferences. We invest in the experts. And when the preemption question is close, we research it with the seriousness it deserves — because a Rule 12(b)(6) dismissal on preemption grounds is the single most common way a Class III device case dies.
Steps to Take After a Defective Medical Device Injury in Florida
- Preserve the device if it has been explanted. The surgeon, the hospital, or the pathology lab may have retained the device. Request preservation in writing immediately. Do not let the hospital discard it.
- Obtain the operative report, pathology report, and device identification sticker. These are usually in your medical record. The device sticker has the manufacturer, model, and lot/serial number.
- Document symptoms. Keep a written log of symptom onset, severity, and impact on function. Save all specialist notes.
- Request complete medical records. Primary care, surgeon, hospital, imaging, physical therapy, any treating specialists.
- Photograph surgical scars, device packaging, and any fragments.
- Do not discuss the device or injury with the manufacturer, the manufacturer’s representative, or the manufacturer’s attorneys.
- Do not sign any release or “patient support program” enrollment without a lawyer reviewing it.
- Do not stop your prescribed medical care.
- Act within the statute of limitations. Medical device claims have a running clock.
- Call Sky Law Firm at (305) 320-4529.
Understanding the Real Compensation You Are Owed
A defective medical device changes the medical trajectory of the patient for the rest of their life. A hip revision patient is statistically more likely to need a second or third revision compared with a patient whose original implant performed correctly. A CPAP-related cancer survivor faces lifetime oncologic surveillance. A BIA-ALCL survivor faces the emotional and physical consequences of explant surgery and chemotherapy. A mesh-complication patient faces chronic pain and possible future surgeries for adhesion or recurrence.
Valuing a device case properly means projecting the full medical and non-medical arc. A life-care planner, a vocational economist, and an experienced device lawyer are all essential. Sky Law Firm retains them. Call (305) 320-4529.
Causes of Medical Device Litigation
Recurring failure patterns include:
- 510(k) clearance based on predicate devices that themselves had defects — the “substantial equivalence” loophole
- Design defects in implant materials (metal-on-metal hip bearings, polypropylene mesh, polyurethane foam)
- Manufacturing defects in specific lots or batches
- Failure to report adverse events to the FDA’s MAUDE database as required
- Off-label promotion of devices for uses never cleared or approved
- Inadequate post-market surveillance and failure to remove devices from the market after failure signals emerged
- Failure to train surgeons adequately in implantation technique
- Misrepresentation of clinical data in PMA and 510(k) submissions
Why Choose a Florida Medical Device Lawyer Who Understands Preemption
Riegel preemption is the single most common dispositive issue in Class III device litigation. A lawyer who does not fully understand the preemption analysis — who cannot articulate the parallel claim doctrine, who has not read Buckman, who cannot distinguish Riegel from Lohr — will lose a winnable case on a Rule 12(b)(6) motion.
Sky Law Firm takes preemption seriously. We research it at intake, not at the motion-to-dismiss stage. We frame complaints with parallel-claim language where the facts support it. And we decline cases where preemption clearly bars the claim, rather than taking a retainer for a case that will be dismissed.
Florida Medical Device Lawyers Serving Statewide
Sky Law Firm serves Florida medical device clients from 3333 W Commercial Blvd STE 105, Fort Lauderdale, FL 33309. Our reach is statewide: Miami-Dade, Broward, Palm Beach, Monroe, Orange, Hillsborough, Duval, Lee, Collier, Pinellas, Sarasota, Volusia, Brevard, Polk, Seminole, Pasco, Osceola, and every other Florida county.
We file into the applicable federal MDLs regardless of the client’s Florida county. Consultations are free and available in English, Spanish, Portuguese, and Creole. Phones answered twenty-four hours. Call (305) 320-4529 or 1-844-OUCH-844.
Types of Florida Defective Medical Device Cases We Handle
Philips Respironics CPAP / BiPAP / ventilator (MDL 3014, W.D. Pa.) — recalled 2021, extending through 2026. DreamStation and related devices. Alleged cancers and pulmonary disease from PE-PUR foam degradation. Currently the highest-volume active medical device mass tort.
Breast implants and BIA-ALCL — textured Allergan BIOCELL implants primarily, with Mentor and Sientra textured lines also implicated. Breast implant illness (BII) claims for silicone leak, capsular contracture, and systemic symptoms.
Hip implants — DePuy ASR, DePuy Pinnacle, Stryker Rejuvenate and ABG II, Zimmer Durom, Smith & Nephew BHR, Wright Medical Profemur, Exactech Connexion GXL.
Knee implants — Exactech Optetrak, Truliant, Vantage; Zimmer NexGen; Arthrex iBalance; some DePuy Attune components.
Hernia mesh — Ethicon Physiomesh (MDL 2782), Bard Davol Ventralight, Ventralex, 3DMax, Composix (MDL 2846), Atrium C-Qur (MDL 2753), Covidien Parietex.
IVC filters — Bard (Recovery, G2, Eclipse, Meridian, Denali — MDL 2641), Cook Medical (Celect, Gunther Tulip — MDL 2570).
Pacemakers and defibrillators — Medtronic HeartWare HVAD (recalled 2021), St. Jude / Abbott Riata and Durata leads, Abbott premature battery depletion.
Transvaginal and pelvic mesh — Ethicon Gynecare, Boston Scientific, AMS, Coloplast (largely resolved, some residual claims).
Surgical staplers, robotic surgery platforms, and power morcellators.
Cochlear implants, insulin pumps, and infusion pumps.
Common Injuries in Florida Medical Device Cases
Medical device failures produce a recognizable spectrum of injury, and each failure mode requires specific medical and engineering documentation:
- Implant loosening and revision surgery. Component aseptic loosening at the bone-implant interface typically requires open revision surgery with longer operative times, higher blood loss, and higher perioperative morbidity than the original primary procedure. Revision outcomes are statistically inferior to primary outcomes for most implant categories.
- Metallosis, cobalt and chromium toxicity. Metal-on-metal hip and certain knee bearings shed cobalt and chromium ions that elevate on serum metal panels and accumulate in soft tissue. Systemic cobalt toxicity has been associated with cardiomyopathy, neurotoxicity, and thyroid effects.
- Pseudotumor and soft tissue necrosis around failed metal-on-metal bearings.
- Mesh erosion, adhesion, and bowel obstruction in hernia and pelvic mesh cases. Some mesh injuries manifest years after implantation.
- Chronic pelvic or abdominal pain from mesh contracture and foreign-body reaction.
- Device fracture, migration, perforation in IVC filters, cardiac leads, and structural implants.
- Lung cancer, laryngeal cancer, nasopharyngeal cancer alleged in the Philips CPAP litigation, following years of inhalation of degraded PE-PUR foam particulates and VOCs.
- Pulmonary fibrosis and severe respiratory disease.
- BIA-ALCL — breast implant-associated anaplastic large cell lymphoma, a T-cell lymphoma of the peri-implant capsule linked principally to textured-surface implants.
- Breast implant illness (BII) — systemic symptoms reported by implant recipients, including fatigue, cognitive symptoms, autoimmune-pattern complaints, and joint pain, with the clinical literature still evolving.
- Cardiac tamponade, stroke, pulmonary embolism following IVC filter fracture and strut migration to the right atrium or pulmonary vasculature.
- Device-related sepsis from contaminated, eroded, or migrated devices.
- Permanent nerve injury from device implantation or device failure compressing adjacent neural structures.
- Wrongful death across the full device category.
Why You Need a Florida Medical Device Lawyer
The manufacturers — Medtronic, Abbott, Stryker, Zimmer Biomet, DePuy (J&J), Bard (BD), Boston Scientific, Ethicon (J&J), Philips, and others — are among the largest medical device companies in the world. Their defense infrastructure is equal to or greater than the pharmaceutical industry’s. They have retained counsel with decades of device-litigation experience, in-house regulatory experts with long histories at the FDA, and unlimited expert witness budgets.
A plaintiff without counsel, or with counsel inexperienced in device litigation, is massively outgunned. Sky Law Firm has the experience, the capital, and the co-counsel relationships to close that gap. Call (305) 320-4529.
Florida Defective Medical Device Statistics and Data
Understanding the scope of defective medical device cases in Florida helps demonstrate the severity and urgency of your claim. Florida courts and insurance companies evaluate cases within the context of statewide patterns.
Florida handles thousands of defective medical device cases annually. Contact Sky Law Firm for specific statistics relevant to your case.
The Insurance Company's Playbook in Defective Medical Device Cases
Insurance companies handling defective medical device claims in Florida follow a predictable strategy designed to minimize your payout. Understanding their tactics is the first step to defeating them.
Delay Tactics
Adjusters know that injured victims need money for medical bills, rent, and daily expenses. By dragging out the claims process — requesting redundant documentation, “losing” paperwork, scheduling and canceling appointments — they pressure you into accepting a lowball offer out of financial desperation. Florida’s 2-year statute of limitations under HB 837 makes this delay even more dangerous.
Recorded Statement Traps
Within 24-48 hours of your defective medical device, an insurance adjuster will call requesting a “routine recorded statement.” This is not routine. The adjuster is trained to ask questions that elicit responses they can use against you — “How are you feeling today?” (if you say “fine,” they argue you weren’t seriously hurt), “Can you describe exactly what happened?” (they look for inconsistencies with the police report). Never give a recorded statement without Sky Law Firm present.
Surveillance and Social Media Monitoring
Insurance companies hire private investigators to follow claimants, photograph them at grocery stores and gyms, and monitor their Facebook, Instagram, and TikTok accounts. A photo of you smiling at a family dinner can be presented to a jury as “proof” that your injuries aren’t as severe as claimed. Until your case is resolved, make all social media accounts private and do not post about your activities.
Independent Medical Examination (IME)
The insurer will request that you see “their” doctor for an “independent” medical examination. These doctors are paid by insurance companies and routinely minimize injuries. Their reports are designed to contradict your treating physician’s findings. Sky Law Firm prepares every client for IMEs and, when necessary, challenges biased IME reports with our own medical experts.
Comparative Negligence Manipulation
Under Florida’s 51% bar (HB 837), if the insurer can push your fault above 50%, they pay nothing. Defense attorneys and adjusters now invest heavily in fault-shifting — hiring accident reconstruction experts, interviewing witnesses selectively, and analyzing your driving history. Sky Law Firm counters with our own reconstruction experts, biomechanical analysis, and electronic data recovery.
What to Expect During Your Defective Medical Device Case
Phase 1: Investigation (Weeks 1-8)
Sky Law Firm immediately sends spoliation letters to preserve evidence, obtains the police report, coordinates your medical care with qualified providers, interviews witnesses, photographs the scene, and builds the initial liability file. We handle everything — you focus on healing.
Phase 2: Maximum Medical Improvement (Months 2-12)
Your case value cannot be fully assessed until you reach Maximum Medical Improvement (MMI) — the point where your condition has stabilized. Settling before MMI almost always leaves money on the table because future medical needs aren’t yet known. Sky Law Firm monitors your treatment progress and coordinates with your physicians.
Phase 3: Demand and Negotiation (Months 6-18)
Once MMI is reached, we assemble a comprehensive demand package: all medical records and bills, expert reports (life care planner, economist, vocational), photographs, and a detailed legal brief. This package is designed to demonstrate the full value of your case and create bad-faith exposure if the insurer refuses to pay within policy limits (Fla. Stat. § 624.155).
Phase 4: Litigation (If Necessary)
If the insurer refuses to pay fair value, we file suit in the appropriate Florida circuit court. Discovery, depositions, expert disclosure, mediation, and trial preparation follow. Most cases settle during or after mediation — but Sky Law Firm prepares every case as if it will go to verdict, because that preparation is what drives settlement value.
Why Hiring a Lawyer Fast Matters in Florida Defective Medical Device Cases
Every day you wait after a defective medical device in Florida, your case gets weaker:
- Surveillance footage from nearby businesses is overwritten on 7-14 day loops
- Witness memories fade and witnesses relocate
- Physical evidence at the scene is cleaned up, repaired, or altered
- Your 14-day PIP deadline approaches — miss it and you lose up to $10,000 in coverage
- The 2-year statute of limitations clock keeps ticking — once it expires, your claim is gone forever
- The insurance company is already building its defense — gathering your social media posts, pulling your driving record, and preparing to dispute your injuries
Sky Law Firm acts immediately upon retention. We send spoliation letters within 24 hours, coordinate emergency medical care, and begin investigation before evidence disappears.
Call (305) 320-4529 or 1-844-OUCH-844 now — 24/7, free consultation, no fee unless we win.
Meet Attorney Andrew Sky
Andrew Jarrett Sky, Esq. founded Sky Law Firm, P.A. in 2012.
- Education: University of Miami School of Law (JD)
- Bar: Florida state courts, USDC Southern District of Florida
- Languages: English, Spanish, Portuguese, Haitian Creole
- Credentials: National Trial Lawyers Top 100, Super Lawyers, AVVO 8.1 (4.8★), America’s Top 100 PI Attorneys
- Case Results: $3M, $1.9M, $1.8M, $1.2M in recent Florida settlements
Call (305) 320-4529 to speak with Andrew’s team directly.
Serving All Major Florida Cities
Why Wait? Start Your Case Today
The Florida statute of limitations is two years for claims accruing after March 24, 2023. MDL intake windows close. Settlement matrices fill. Medical records get purged. Surgeons who implanted your device retire and relocate. Evidence degrades.
If you have been injured by a medical device, call Sky Law Firm today.
Here’s How You Can Reach Us:
- Phone: (305) 320-4529
- Toll-Free: 1-844-OUCH-844
- Address: 3333 W Commercial Blvd STE 105, Fort Lauderdale, FL 33309
- Firm: Sky Law Firm
- Attorney: Andrew Sky
- Languages: English, Spanish, Portuguese, Creole
- Consultation: Free, confidential, available 24/7
- Fees: Contingency — no recovery, no fee
Every case is evaluated on its own facts. Past results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Information on this page is general information only and is not legal advice as to any specific matter. Whether you have a viable Florida medical device claim can only be determined by a licensed attorney reviewing your specific facts.
Visit Sky Law Firm
Sky Law Firm
3333 W Commercial Blvd STE 105, Fort Lauderdale, FL 33309
(305) 320-4529
What Our Clients Say
Real reviews from real clients on Google.
⭐ Rated 4.8/5 on Avvo · 120+ Five-Star Reviews
Real reviews from real clients across Florida.
Leave a ReviewSee Our Avvo ReviewsFree Case Review — 24/7
Tell us about your injury. A Sky Law Firm attorney will review your case and respond within one hour. No fee unless we win.
Free Case Review — 24/7
Tell us about your injury. A Sky Law Firm attorney will review your case and respond within one hour. No fee unless we win.
Prefer to talk? Call (305) 320-4529 anytime.
Prefer to talk? Call (305) 320-4529 anytime.