Colavito v. New York Organ Donor Network, Inc.

860 N.E.2d 713 (2006)

Purchase the Printed Copy at bsmsphd.com

Nature of the Case

To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.

Facts

Peter Lucia died at Good Samaritan Hospital on Long Island. His widow, Debra Lucia, sought to donate his kidney (or kidneys) to P, Peter's longtime friend who had been suffering from end-stage renal disease. Debra proceeded by going through D. It was concluded that Peter's kidneys were 'not a perfect match but they [were] good enough.' Peter's left kidney was air-lifted to Jackson Memorial Hospital in Miami, Florida, where P was awaiting its transplantation; Peter's other kidney remained in New York. A surgeon inspected the donated kidney and discovered an aneurysm of the renal artery, making the kidney unsuitable for transplantation. He immediately contacted D, asking for Peter's other kidney, and was informed that it had been allocated to someone else. P brought suit in the United States District Court alleging fraud, conversion and violations of New York Public Health Law Articles 43and 43-A. Ds moved for summary judgment. The presented the deposition of Dr. Burke, in which he recounted the relevant events of August 23, 2002. He testified that when he found the first kidney unacceptable (owing to the aneurysm), the tissue-typing lab was performing other tests, reconfirming the blood group, retesting P's tissue and running cross-matching. About 12 hours after discovering the aneurysm, Dr. Burke learned of the positive cross-match which, he said, would have prevented the successful transplant of either kidney. D's motion for summary judgment was granted. P failed to state a cause of action for fraud, not having shown how he was harmed by any justifiable reliance on Ds' alleged misrepresentation. In rejecting the conversion claim, the District Court held, in essence, that contract law ill-suits organ donations and that it would be 'inappropriate to expand the limited right that courts recognize in a deceased's body, which only belongs to the next of kin to ensure proper burial.' P appealed. The following questions were certified. (1) Do the applicable provisions of the New York Public Health Law vest the intended recipient of a directed donation with rights that can be vindicated in a private party's lawsuit sounding in the common law tort of conversion or through a private right of action inferred from the New York Public Health Law? (2) Does New York Public Health Law immunize either negligent or grossly negligent misconduct? '(3) If a donee can bring a private action to enforce the rights referred to in question 1, may the plaintiff recover nominal or punitive damages, without demonstrating pecuniary loss or other actual injury?