Practice Areas
- Defective Medical Products
- Guidant Class Action Lawsuit
- Medicines
- Compounding Pharmacy Error
- Visicol Kidney Failure
- Visicol Lawsuit
- OsmoPrep Lawsuit
- Acute Phosphate Nephropathy
- DePuy Lawsuit
- Hip Replacement Lawsuit
- Hip Replacement Lawyer
- Hip Replacement Recall Lawsuit
- Hip Revision Surgery Lawsuit
- Hip Revision Surgery Lawyer
- Johnson & Johnson Hip Class Action Lawsuit
- Lawsuit against DePuy for Hip Revision Surgery
- Yasmin Lawsuit
- Yasmin Class Action Lawsuit
- Yaz Lawsuit
- Class Action Lawsuit Yaz
- Hip Replacement Lawyer Minneapolis, MN
- Lawyer for DePuy Lawsuit Minneapolis, MN
- FDA Recalls
- News & Topics
Other Practice Areas
- E coli Poisoning
- Hemolytic Uremic Syndrome (HUS)
- Campylobacter
- Clostridium Perfringens
- Hemolytic Uremic Syndrome (HUS)
- Hepatitis A Food Poisoning
- Listeria Poisoning
- Listeriosis
- Salmonella Lawyer
- Shigella
- Amputation
- Burn Attorney
- Spinal Cord Injury
- Traumatic Brain Injury
- Wrongful Death
- Car Accident Attorney MN
- Defective Products
- Foodborne Illness
- Medical Malpractice
- MN Accident Attorney
- Minnesota Dog Bite Attorney
- Minnesota Injury Lawyer
- Semi Truck Accident Lawyer MN
- Child Safety Lawyers
Personal Injury and Wrongful Death
Guidant Pacemaker Recall
At the law firm of PritzkerOlsen, P.A. , we represent people across the United States in actions against biomedical companies for injuries and death caused by defective medical devices. Recently, Guidant Corporation has recalled certain models of Guidant pacemakers. Our attorneys understand the pain and uncertainty this has caused Guidant heart device patients, and we are here to help patients understand their legal rights and Guidant’s legal responsibilities for selling potentially defective Guidant pacemakers. Attorney Fred Pritzker has had more than 30 years of experience getting results for clients and has been named, once again, a Top 100 Super Lawyer. He has also been selected for inclusion in the current edition of The Best Lawyers in America.
If you or someone you love has had a Guidant pacemaker removed or is considering that option, the attorneys at PritzkerOlsen, P.A. are available to discuss your concerns. You can reach our attorneys for a free consultation by calling toll-free at 1-888-377-8900 or filling out our online Guidant free consultation form.
Fatality and Injuries Prompt Recall of Guidant Pacemakers
As of early July 2005, Guidant had received reports of 69 Guidant pacemaker failures. One death may be linked to a Guidant pacemaker that sustained pacing at an abnormally rapid rate. The models recalled include the following:
PULSAR® MAX Models 1170, 1171, 1270
PULSAR Models 0470, 0870, 0970, 0972, 1172, 1272
DISCOVERY® Models 1174, 1175, 1273, 1274, 1275
MERIDIAN® Models 0476, 0976, 1176, 1276
PULSAR MAX II Models 1180, 1181, 1280
DISCOVERY II Models 0481, 0981, 1184, 1186, 1187, 1283, 1284, 1285, 1286
CONTAK TR® Model 1241
VIRTUS PLUS® II* Models 1380, 1480
INTELIS II Models 1483, 1484, 1485, 1384, 1385, 1349, 1499
Guidant Not Willing to Pay for All Medical Expenses Incurred Due to Replacement of Guidant Pacemaker
Although Guidant has agreed to, under certain circumstances, replace the recalled Guidant pacemakers, Guidant has claimed it will pay only a limited amount of medical costs associated with the replacement. This puts a financial burden on patients wanting to have potentially defective Guidant pacemakers replaced.
At PritzkerOlsen, P.A. we have already filed a class action suit against Guidant on behalf of patients with defective Guidant defibrillators. If you have one of the recalled Guidant pacemakers or have recently had one replaced, our experienced attorneys will help you understand what legal actions you can take against Guidant to ensure the payment of all medical costs associated with replacement and to be compensated for loss of income and pain and suffering.
Free Case Consultation
We are Not Paid Unless You Win
Our attorneys work on a continguency fee basis, meaning you do not have to pay our law firm for representing you unless we win you money.
Firm News
AV Preeminent Rating by Martindale-Hubbell
![]()
Attorneys Fred Pritzker and Eric Hageman have been given the highest rating by Martindale-Hubbell for attorney, AV Preeminent. An AV® certification mark is a significant rating accomplishment - a testament to the fact that a lawyer's peers rank him or her at the highest level of professional excellence.
Adjunct Teaching Position At U of M Law School
Attorney Brendan Flaherty has accepted an adjunct teaching position at the University of Minnesota Law School. For the 2011 spring semester, Flaherty will teach a course entitled "Practice and Professionalism," which will introduce students to foundational lawyering skills and professional responsibility issues.
Attorney Elliot Olsen Speaks at Conference
Attorney Elliot Olsen recently spoke at the Seventh Annual LifeScience Alley Conference in Minneapolis on Preemption and the Future of Medical Device Litigation. He appeared with Randall Pattee of Lindquist and Vennum and Jean Lance, VP of corporate legal and general counsel for Boston Scientific.
Named Super Lawyer
In recognition of their
achievements, Attorneys Fred Pritzker, Elliot Olsen and Eric Hageman were named "Super Lawyers" by Law & Politics magazine. According to Super Lawyers, "The objective is to create a credible, comprehensive and diverse listing of outstanding attorneys that can be used as a resource to assist attorneys and consumers in the search for legal counsel."
Brendan Flaherty Named a Rising Star
In recognition of his achievements, Attorney Brendan Flaherty was named a 2010 Rising Star by Minnesota Law & Politics. Only 2.5 percent of the state’s lawyers are included on the list, which highlights Minnesota’s best up-and-coming legal talent.
Fred Pritzker Listed in The Best Lawyers in America
Fred Pritzker has been notified that he will again be listed in The Best Lawyers in America for his work in personal injury litigation.
This is attorney advertising. Past results do not guarantee a similar outcome. The result of each case is determined by the specific facts and the applicable law.

