Quimbee logo
DMCA.com Protection Status

Vassallo v. Baxter Healthcare Corp.

696 N.E.2d 909 (Mass.1998)

Case BriefQ&ARelatedOptions
From our private database of 22,300+ case briefs...

Vassallo v. Baxter Healthcare Corp.

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

696 N.E.2d 909 (Mass.1998)

Play video

Facts

In February 1977, Florence Vassallo (plaintiff) underwent breast implantation surgery and received silicone-gel implants manufactured by Heyer-Schulte Corporation. Baxter Healthcare Corp. (Baxter Healthcare) and Baxter International, Inc. (Baxter International) (defendants) eventually assumed responsibility for breast-implant products manufactured by Heyer-Schulte. In 1992, Vassallo had a mammogram after complaining of severe chest pain. The mammogram revealed that her left breast implant had ruptured, and her right implant contained small holes through which silicone gel was leaking. Vassallo suffered permanent tissue scarring, chronic inflammation, and problems with her immune system due to the silicone-gel leakage. She and her husband brought suit against Baxter Healthcare and Baxter International. She stated that if she had known of the risks associated with gel leakage, she would not have had the procedure. Additionally, evidence was introduced at trial showing that Heyer-Schulte knew of the possible risks associated with leakage of implants at the time they were received by Vassallo, and did not inform her of all the potential risks. The jury found that the defendants had actual or constructive knowledge of the risks of breast implants at the time they were given to Vassallo and also found the defendants liable for negligence. Baxter Healthcare and Baxter International appealed.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Greaney, J.)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 517,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

    Unlock this case briefRead our student testimonials
  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.

    Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee

Here's why 517,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 22,300 briefs, keyed to 984 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.

Questions and answers

Have a question about this case?

Sign up for a free 7-day trial and ask it

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 517,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 22,300 briefs - keyed to 984 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership