California resident Roseanne Sanchez was implanted with the Pinnacle kit to treat pelvic organ prolapse and the Advantage System to treat stress urinary incontinence.

After the surgery, Ms. Sanchez experienced several complications including dyspareunia and erosion of the mesh. In 2011, she underwent revision surgery during which her doctor removed a portion of the TVT-O’s mesh. After the revision surgery, Ms. Sanchez’s stress urinary incontinence symptoms returned, and she experienced constant pelvic and vaginal pain.

Ms. and Mr. Sanchez filed suit directly in the Boston Scientific Pelvic Repair Products Multidistrict Litigation. Ms. Sanchez and her husband asserted that the Boston Scientific devices, Pinnacle and Advantage System caused Ms. Sanchez to suffer severe complications, including bleeding, cramping, painful intercourse, pelvic pain vaginal discharge and vaginal pain. They asserted a loss of consortium, negligence, punitive damages and strict liability (defective design and failure to warn) claims.

Defendant Boston Scientific filed a Motion for Summary Judgment on the punitive damages claim. The parties disagreed on whether California or Massachusetts law applied to the punitive damage claim. Boston Scientific is a Delaware corporation with its principle place of business in Massachusetts. Boston Scientific urged the court to apply Massachusetts law, asserting that Massachusetts has an interest in protecting its citizens from excessive financial liability. Ms. and Mr. Sanchez asserted that California punitive apply because California has the greatest interest in seeing its law applied to injuries occurring within its borders.

Judge Goodman noted that California permits award of punitive damages. Massachusetts prohibits award of punitive damages unless expressly authorized by statute. The judge’s conclusion was that, “California has a clear interest in applying its punitive damages law. California’s punitive damage law serves the important purpose of punishing and deterring harmful conduct… In contrast, Massachusetts has no legitimate interest in applying its prohibition on punitive damages to injuries occurring outside damages of Massachusetts.”

The judge overseeing the Boston Scientific transvaginal mesh multidistrict litigation denied the manufacturer’s Motion for Summary Judgment on the claim for punitive damages. Judge Goodman ruled that Ms. and Mr. Sanchez had adequately alleged malice or oppression as required by California law.