a. Facts-
P underwent surgery in which Ds removed his spleen. Without P’s knowledge, D
conducted research on P’s cells from the spleen to develop a “cell line”, which
Ds then obtained a patent on. Said cell line is worth 3bil dollars. P sued for
conversion of his cells
b. Procedural
History- Trial Ct dismissed complaint. Ct of appeals reversed. California Sup
Ct reversed Ct of appeals.
c. Issue-
Whether the P had ownership in the excised cells such that he may file suit for
conversion.
d. Holding-
No, P cannot claim ownership to the excised cells for the purpose of filing
conversion suit
e. Rule-
Under conversion theory, no action can be brought where the subject matter is
cells excised during medical treatment. However, action may be brought under
breach of fiduciary duty or informed-consent theories
f. Rationale-
“We should not threaten with disabling civil liability innocent parties who are
engaged in socially useful activities”. Also, patients should have the right to
make autonomous medical decisions.
thanks!
ReplyDelete