While there's apparently no doubt that the contact lenses were the problem, the big question is this: Was it due to a product defect or was it due to an allergic reaction with no product defect?
You can google "allergic reaction to contact lenses" and you'll see what I'm talking about.
If it was an allergic reaction to the contact lenses with no product defect then she has no case and the manufacturer is likely going to offer a modest amount of go-away money without any admission of fault and hiring a lawyer is not likely to change that.
If there actually was a product defect the next question is whether there was a temporary condition that she recovered from or a permanent condition.
A temporary condition caused by a product defect with complete recovery is not worth much money. She might be able to get her meds, lost earnings, and something for pain and suffering (not much if she was only out of work for a couple of weeks).
Last but not least, permanent damage due to a product defect could be worth a lot of money and would be worth hiring an attorney.
However, without actual proof of a product defect (hey, here's the lens, it's defective) she might as well just see what she can negotiate with the manufacturer.
Although talking to a few more attorneys first couldn't hurt.