Trifecta GT Heart Valve Lawsuit, Nebraska Widow Says Valve Failure Contributed to Husband’s Death

Amy Nachman, individually and as special administrator of the estate of Alan Potash, is suing Abbott Laboratories Inc. and St. Jude Medical, Cardiology Division, Inc. She alleges that a Trifecta GT artificial heart valve implanted in her husband in February 2018 failed in September 2024, that a leaflet had completely torn away when surgeons removed it, and that the failure contributed to his death on September 22, 2024.

The defendants removed the case from Nebraska state court to federal court on October 1, 2026. It is now Nachman v. Abbott Laboratories Inc. et al., No. 8:26-cv-00586, in the U.S. District Court for the District of Nebraska.

These are allegations in a lawsuit, not findings. No court has decided that the valve caused Mr. Potash’s death or that either defendant is legally responsible, and the defendants have not admitted liability. This is an individual case, not a class action. There is no settlement, claim form or sign-up deadline, and other patients with a Trifecta or Trifecta GT valve are not part of it.

Trifecta GT Heart Valve Lawsuit: Quick Facts

Detail	Information
Plaintiff	Amy Nachman, individually and as special administrator of Alan Potash’s estate
Defendants	Abbott Laboratories Inc. and St. Jude Medical, Cardiology Division, Inc.
State court	District Court of Douglas County, Nebraska
State case number	D01CI260007728
Federal court	U.S. District Court for the District of Nebraska
Federal case number	8:26-cv-00586
State complaint filed	August 31, 2026
Removed to federal court	October 1, 2026
Device	Trifecta GT tissue aortic heart valve, model TFGT-21A (21 mm)
Alleged implant date	February 20, 2018, at Nebraska Methodist Hospital in Omaha
Replacement surgery	September 9, 2024 (replaced with a 23 mm Inspiris valve, per the complaint)
Date of death	September 22, 2024
Claims	Manufacturing defect, negligent manufacture and inspection, negligence, failure to warn, breach of warranty, wrongful death and a survival action
Damages amount	Not stated in the complaint
Class action	No
Settlement or claim form	None
Court ruling	None identified

What Happened to Alan Potash’s Trifecta GT Heart Valve?

This timeline comes from the allegations in the complaint.

February 20, 2018. Mr. Potash had surgery at Nebraska Methodist Hospital in Omaha to receive a Trifecta GT bioprosthetic aortic valve. The Trifecta GT is a surgically implanted tissue valve that replaces a diseased or damaged aortic valve. The FDA approved it in 2016 through the premarket approval (PMA) process.

September 2024. The complaint alleges that he developed severe aortic regurgitation, a condition in which the aortic valve does not close properly and blood flows backward. On September 9, 2024, he had surgery to remove the Trifecta GT and replace it with a different valve. The complaint says the operative report recorded that one leaflet of the Trifecta GT had completely torn away. A leaflet is one of the flexible sections that opens and closes to control blood flow.

September 22, 2024. Mr. Potash died, 13 days after the replacement surgery. The complaint alleges the valve failure led to severe heart complications and contributed to his death. The cause of death and its link to the valve are disputed questions that a court would have to decide.

The complaint alleges the valve lasted about six years. Whether that is shorter than expected for a tissue valve, and whether it reflects a defect, is something expert testimony would have to address.

What Does the Nachman Lawsuit Allege Against Abbott and St. Jude?

The complaint raises claims under Nebraska law.

Was the Trifecta GT Valve Allegedly Defective in Manufacture?

The central allegation is that this specific valve was made outside its approved specifications, including those governing how the tissue leaflets are treated, supported and attached. Ms. Nachman argues that the torn leaflet found in 2024 shows a departure from the device’s approved manufacturing requirements. The defendants can be expected to dispute the alleged defect, the reading of the medical evidence, and any link to the death.

Did the Defendants Allegedly Fail to Act on Safety Information?

The complaint also alleges that Abbott and St. Jude did not adequately act on information about early structural valve deterioration (SVD), meaning deterioration of a replacement valve that can lead to treatment or another surgery. It alleges failures in post-market monitoring, reporting and warnings, and argues that earlier warnings and closer monitoring could have let Mr. Potash’s doctors detect the problem sooner. Whether that would have changed the outcome is disputed.

What Are Wrongful Death and Survival Claims?

A wrongful death claim seeks compensation for losses suffered by eligible surviving family members. A survival action seeks damages the deceased person could have recovered for his own injuries before death, such as pain and suffering and medical expenses. In Nebraska, wrongful-death actions are governed by Neb. Rev. Stat. §§ 30-809 and 30-810, and the survival of claims by § 25-1401. Under § 30-810, a wrongful-death action must generally be started within two years of the death.

What Did the FDA Say About Trifecta and Trifecta GT Valves?

The FDA’s notice, which is official background to the case but does not decide it:

• February 27, 2023. The FDA told health care providers about the potential risk of early structural valve deterioration with Abbott Trifecta valves, including the Trifecta GT. The FDA said published literature suggested a higher cumulative incidence of early SVD (five years or less) than other commercially available surgical bioprosthetic valves, and noted these valves have leaflets mounted externally on the valve frame.
• Device reports. The FDA said it had received medical device reports showing a peak time to SVD of three to four years after implant, with reported outcomes including surgical valve replacement, transcatheter valve-in-valve procedures and, in some cases, death. It also noted that these reports cannot show how often the problem occurs.
• July 31, 2023. Abbott announced it would stop selling and distributing Trifecta valves in the United States. The FDA said its recommendations had not changed.
• Approval dates. The first-generation Trifecta valve was approved in 2011 and the Trifecta GT in 2016.

Official source: FDA, Abbott Trifecta Valves: Potential Risk of Early Structural Valve Deterioration.

The FDA notice does not say every Trifecta valve is defective, and it does not address Mr. Potash’s valve.

What Should Patients With a Trifecta or Trifecta GT Valve Do?

This is general information, not medical advice. Talk to your cardiologist or cardiac surgeon about your own device and symptoms. The FDA’s recommendations for providers were to:

• Monitor patients who have these valves for signs of possible deterioration
• Tell patients to seek medical attention for new symptoms such as shortness of breath or fatigue
• Arrange lifelong follow-up, at least yearly, including an echocardiogram (TTE) of the valve beginning one year after implant

Do not stop follow-up care or make treatment decisions because of a news article. You or your doctor can report problems with a device to the FDA through MedWatch.

What Legal Issues Could Shape the Trifecta GT Case?

Why Did Abbott Move the Case to Federal Court?

The defendants removed the case under federal diversity jurisdiction, which generally lets defendants move a state case to federal court when the parties are citizens of different states and more than $75,000 is at stake (28 U.S.C. §§ 1332(a), 1441). The removal notice states that the amount in controversy exceeds that threshold. Removal is not an admission of liability, and it only changes the court. The plaintiff can ask the federal court to send the case back to state court if she believes removal was improper (28 U.S.C. § 1447).

Could Federal Preemption Block the State-Law Claims?

Probably the most important issue in cases like this one. The Trifecta GT is a Class III device approved through the PMA process. Under the Medical Device Amendments, 21 U.S.C. § 360k(a), state-law requirements that are “different from, or in addition to” federal requirements for a PMA device are preempted. In Riegel v. Medtronic, Inc., 552 U.S. 312 (2008), the Supreme Court held that this bars many state-law claims against PMA devices. Claims that a device was made in a way that violated the FDA-approved requirements, sometimes called parallel claims, can survive, which is why the complaint here argues that its manufacturing claims rest on alleged departures from existing federal requirements. Claims that depend only on violating FDA rules, with no state-law duty, face a further obstacle under Buckman Co. v. Plaintiffs’ Legal Committee, 531 U.S. 341 (2001).

How courts apply these rules to Trifecta claims has varied. For example, Mealey’s reported that a Kentucky federal judge dismissed a Trifecta heart valve suit on March 30, 2026, finding the claims preempted by federal law. That decision does not bind the Nebraska court and says nothing about how this case will come out.

What Evidence Could Matter?

The parties may need the removed valve and pathology records, surgical and hospital records, manufacturing and inspection records, and expert opinions on valve durability, the cause of the tear and the cause of death.

What Happens Next in Nachman v. Abbott Laboratories?

As of October 9, 2026, the sources reviewed show the removal and the original complaint but no ruling and no response from either defendant. Typical next steps are:

1. Defendants’ response. Abbott and St. Jude may answer or file a motion to dismiss, likely raising preemption.
2. Possible remand request. The plaintiff may challenge removal.
3. Discovery and experts, if the claims survive.
4. Summary judgment and, if the case continues, trial or settlement.

Check the court’s official records before relying on any procedural status: U.S. District Court for the District of Nebraska.

Is There a Trifecta GT Class Action or Settlement?

No. The complaint does not ask the court to certify a class, and no settlement or public claim form has been identified. A patient with a Trifecta or Trifecta GT valve is not automatically part of this case.

People who believe a valve failed early or that a relative’s death is related to one should consider speaking with a licensed attorney. Deadlines can be short and depend on the state. In Nebraska, for example, product-liability claims generally have a four-year limitations period and a ten-year limit measured from when the product was first sold (Neb. Rev. Stat. § 25-224), and wrongful-death claims generally have two years from the death (§ 30-810).

For related coverage of another medical-device case, see Abbott Spinal Cord Stimulator Lawsuit, Were You Affected? — Doherty v. Advanced Neuromodulation Systems Inc., No. 2:26-cv-07195. It involves a different device and a separate case.

Trifecta GT Lawsuit: Key Dates

Date	Event
2011	FDA approves the first-generation Trifecta valve
2016	FDA approves the Trifecta GT
February 20, 2018	Alan Potash receives a Trifecta GT valve (per the complaint)
February 27, 2023	FDA letter to providers on potential early structural valve deterioration
July 31, 2023	Abbott announces it will stop selling Trifecta valves in the U.S.
September 9, 2024	Replacement surgery; leaflet allegedly found completely torn away
September 22, 2024	Mr. Potash dies
August 31, 2026	Complaint filed in Douglas County, Nebraska
October 1, 2026	Case removed to the U.S. District Court for the District of Nebraska

Frequently Asked Questions About the Trifecta GT Heart Valve Lawsuit

Who filed the Trifecta GT wrongful death lawsuit?

Amy Nachman, individually and as special administrator of the estate of her husband, Alan Potash.

What is the case number?

The federal case is No. 8:26-cv-00586 in the U.S. District Court for the District of Nebraska. The state case was No. D01CI260007728 in the District Court of Douglas County, Nebraska.

What does the lawsuit say caused Alan Potash’s death?

It alleges that his Trifecta GT valve failed, causing severe aortic regurgitation and the need for replacement surgery on September 9, 2024, that a leaflet had completely torn away, and that the failure contributed to his death on September 22, 2024. These claims have not been proven.

Is there a Trifecta GT class action or claim form?

No. This is an individual lawsuit, and no class action, settlement or claim form has been identified.

Has a court found Abbott or St. Jude responsible?

No. No ruling has been identified, and the defendants have not admitted liability.

What did the FDA say about Trifecta valves?

In February 2023 the FDA warned of a potential risk of early structural valve deterioration, and in July 2023 Abbott stopped U.S. sales. The FDA recommended monitoring and at least yearly follow-up with echocardiograms for patients who have these valves.

Could federal law prevent this lawsuit from going forward?

It is a possible defense. Because the Trifecta GT is a PMA-approved device, the defendants can argue that federal law preempts some state-law claims. Courts have reached different results.

What should I do if I have a Trifecta GT valve?

Speak with your cardiologist about your follow-up schedule, and seek prompt medical attention for new symptoms such as shortness of breath or fatigue.

Sources and Legal References

1. Nachman v. Abbott Laboratories Inc. et al., No. 8:26-cv-00586 (D. Neb.), notice of removal and attached complaint, as described in the case filing
2. U.S. Food and Drug Administration, Abbott Trifecta Valves: Potential Risk of Early Structural Valve Deterioration (February 27, 2023, updated July 31, 2023)
3. U.S. Food and Drug Administration, Trifecta GT premarket approval record
4. Mealey’s Drugs & Devices, Judge Agrees To Dismiss Suit Claiming FDA-Approved Trifecta Heart Valve Failed, March 30, 2026
5. 21 U.S.C. § 360k(a); 28 U.S.C. §§ 1332, 1441, 1447; Riegel v. Medtronic, Inc., 552 U.S. 312 (2008); Buckman Co. v. Plaintiffs’ Legal Committee, 531 U.S. 341 (2001); Neb. Rev. Stat. §§ 25-224, 25-1401, 30-809 and 30-810

This article provides general information, not legal or medical advice. The allegations in a complaint are not proof of wrongdoing or liability. AllAboutLawyer.com is not a law firm. Make medical decisions with your treating physician and consult a licensed attorney about any legal question.

Researched and written by Israr Ahmad, legal content researcher and founder of AllAboutLawyer.com. All facts checked against the FDA’s official notice, the federal filing in No. 8:26-cv-00586 as described in public reporting, and the cited statutes and cases, as of October 9, 2026. Last Updated: October 9, 2026.