Viccaro v. Milunsky
Massachusetts Supreme Court
551 N.E.2d 8 (1990)
- Written by Lauren Petersen, JD
Facts
Amy Viccaro (plaintiff) had several family members who suffered from ectodermal dysplasia, a genetic disorder. Ectodermal dysplasia causes severe disfiguration and pain. Prior to marrying, Amy and Thomas Viccaro (plaintiff) consulted with Aubrey Milunsky (defendant), a genetic counselor, to determine whether Amy had or was a carrier for ectodermal dysplasia. Milunsky counseled Amy that she did not have ectodermal dysplasia and could not give it to her children. Amy and Thomas married. The Viccaros’ first child was a healthy girl. The Viccaros’ second child, Adam (plaintiff), was born with ectodermal dysplasia. Adam will require medical care his entire life and will suffer pain and emotional distress. Thomas and Amy have suffered and will continue to suffer emotional distress and pain because of Adam’s disease. The Viccaros sued Milunsky for the negligent infliction of emotional distress. The district court certified several questions to the supreme court, including whether a child born with a genetic defect and his parents may recover against a physician whose negligent counseling led the parents to conceive the child. The supreme court granted certiorari.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Wilkins, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 802,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 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.