Warning

Info

Table of Contents
Lan, SLS '24 |

0 0

Back to briefs

Vassallo v. Baxter Healthcare Corporation

(1998)

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court - 428 Mass. 1

tl;dr:

Plaintiff was injured by defective breast implants, manufactured by a company since bought by Defendant; Court holds that Defendant can only be held liable if it had actual or constructive knowledge of the risk of defects.

Video Summary

ICRAIssue, Conclusion, Rule, Analysis for Vassallo v. Baxter Healthcare Corporation

LSD+ exclusive

This content is exclusively for LSD+ users.

Sign up for LSD+ for full access to the Vassallo v. Baxter Healthcare Corporation case brief summary.

Enjoy unlimited access with our 14-day free trial.

Facts & HoldingVassallo v. Baxter Healthcare Corporation case brief facts & holding

Facts:Plaintiff claimed that silicone gel breast implants, manufactured by a...

Holding:The Court holds that Massachusetts should abandon its hindsight approach...

LSD+ exclusive

This content is exclusively for LSD+ users.

Sign up for LSD+ for full access to the Vassallo v. Baxter Healthcare Corporation case brief summary.

Enjoy unlimited access with our 14-day free trial.

DeepDiveHighlight a legal term to see the definition

Font size -+
Vassallo v. Baxter Healthcare Corporation | Case Brief DeepDive
Majority opinion, author: Greaney, J.
Level 1
Click below 👇 to DeepDive

Baxter Healthcare Corporation and Baxter International, Inc. were held liable for negligently designing silicone breast implants and failing to provide adequate product warnings. The court affirmed the determinations of liability for negligence and violation of G. L. c. 93A. The defendants were aware of the risks of silicone gel breast implants before the plaintiff's surgery. The court changed the products liability law to conform to the majority rule for breach of warranty claims related to failure to warn of risks associated with a product. The judge allowed the plaintiffs' experts to testify on causation opinions regarding whether silicone gel breast implants can cause an atypical connective tissue disease, based on the testimony of an expert epidemiologist. The judge also allowed Dr. Batich's opinion on silicone degradation in the human body. The court did not decide whether the plaintiffs' expert opinions required analysis under the Lanigan standard for scientific reliability or if they could be accepted based on personal observations, clinical experience, or generally accepted scientific techniques. The judge correctly disallowed experts from testifying to out-of-court opinions without a specific exception to the hearsay rule. The judge allowed the defendants to use scientific studies and literature in cross-examination of the plaintiffs' experts. The judge did not err in her rulings on certain items of evidence related to the issue of notice to Heyer-Schulte of the safety of the gel implants.

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua.Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua.Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua.Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua.

LSD+ exclusive

This content is exclusively for LSD+ users.

Sign up for LSD+ for full access to the Vassallo v. Baxter Healthcare Corporation case brief summary.

Enjoy unlimited access with our 14-day free trial.

🤯 High points 🤯Key points contributed by students on LSD

LSD+ exclusive

This content is exclusively for LSD+ users.

Sign up for LSD+ for full access to the Vassallo v. Baxter Healthcare Corporation case brief summary.

Enjoy unlimited access with our 14-day free trial.

LSD+ Case Briefs

Features

  • DeepDive for detailed case analysis
  • Over 50,000 existing case briefs
  • Instant briefs for another 6,000,000 cases
  • Highlight dictionary for legal term definitions
  • Social learning with chat and high points

Over 50,000 Cases Briefed

LSD+ gives you access to over 50,000 case briefs, more than anyone else. Be the first to email us the website of a case brief product that offers you more case briefs and we'll give you a free year of LSD+.

14-Day Free Trial

Unlimited access. Read as much content as you want during your trial with no device limitations. Cancel any time during your trial and keep access for the full 14 days.

Integrated Legal Dictionary

Lawyers and judges love to use big words. And Latin, for some reason.

Highlight a legal term in LSD Briefs and get an instant, plain English definition. Try highlighting contract or specific performance. No need to search or read through a list of definitions, simply highlight the words you don’t know and our LSDefine integration will instantly give you a definition to any of over 30,000 legal terms.

DeepDive

DeepDive allows you to explore legal cases like never before. DeepDive offers multiple levels of case summaries, which empowers you to quickly and easily find the information you need to stay on top of readings. Easily navigate through summary levels and click on any text to get more detail, all the way down to the original legal case text.

Brief anything. Instantly.

Our proprietary state-of-the-art system can instantly brief over 6,000,000 US cases. That means we can probably brief that case that your professor assigned last night when she sent you a poorly scanned pdf and told you to read every third paragraph. Or maybe she uploaded it to Canvas and didn’t really tell you to read it, but you know you probably should. Tenure does wild things to good people.

Social Learning with Chat and High Points

Study groups are a great way to learn and explore a case. LSD has chat rooms for each case to let you ask questions across the community and hear what other students struggled with and how they put it all together. Learn the key points of every case from other LSD+ users and share your knowledge with LSD High Points.

Real-Time Brief Feedback

Don’t settle for mistakes in briefs that have been there for 10 years and never fixed. Find an issue or something missing from a brief? Down vote and we will make improvements. All of our case brief editors graduated from from T14 law schools.

Vassallo v. Baxter Healthcare Corporation

Chat for Vassallo v. Baxter Healthcare Corporation
brief-621
👍 Chat vibe: 0 👎
Help us make LSD better!
Tell us what's important to you
LSD+ is ad-free, with DMs, discounts, case briefs & more.