Moore v. Regents of the University of California

Last updated

Moore v. Regents of the University of California
Seal of the Supreme Court of California.svg
Decided July 9, 1990
Full case nameJohn Moore, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. The Regents of the University of California et al., Defendants and Respondents
Citation(s) 51 Cal. 3d 120 ; 271 Cal. Rptr. 146; 793 P.2d 479
Case history
Prior historyReview granted, California Court of Appeal decision depublished
Subsequent historyRemanded back to Court of Appeal for further proceedings
Holding
Plaintiff stated a cause of action in lack of informed consent and breach of fiduciary duty, but not in conversion
Court membership
Chief Justice Malcolm M. Lucas
Associate Justices Edward A. Panelli, Joyce L. Kennard, Stanley Mosk, Armand Arabian, David N. Eagleson, Allen Broussard
Case opinions
MajorityPanelli, joined by Lucas, Eagleson, Kennard
ConcurrenceArabian
Concur/dissentBroussard
DissentMosk

Moore v. Regents of the University of California was a landmark Supreme Court of California decision. Filed on July 9, 1990, it dealt with the issue of property rights to one's own cells taken in samples by doctors or researchers.

Contents

In 1976, John Moore was treated for hairy cell leukemia by physician David Golde, a cancer researcher at the UCLA Medical Center. Moore's cancer cells were later developed into a cell line that was commercialized by Golde and UCLA. The California Supreme Court ruled that a hospital patient's discarded blood and tissue samples are not his personal property and that individuals do not have rights to a share in the profits earned from commercial products or research derived from their cells. [1] Following this decision, most U.S. courts have ruled against family members who sue researchers and universities over the "improper commercialization" of their dead family member's body parts. [2]

Background

John Moore first visited UCLA Medical Center on October 5, 1976, after he was diagnosed with hairy cell leukemia. Physician and cancer researcher David Golde took samples of Moore's blood, bone marrow, and other bodily fluids to confirm the diagnosis and recommended a splenectomy because of the potentially fatal amount of swelling in Moore's spleen. [3] Moore signed a written consent form, authorizing the procedure. It said the hospital could "dispose of any severed tissue or member by cremation", and his spleen was removed by surgeons, who were not named as defendants, at UCLA Medical Center. [4]

Moore's blood profile returned to normal after only a few days, and further examination of his spleen led Golde to discover that Moore's blood cells were unique in that they produced a protein that stimulated the growth of white blood cells, which help to protect the body from infections. [5]

Moore moved to Seattle, Washington, after his surgery and returned to the UCLA Medical Center for follow-up visits with Golde several times, between 1976 and 1983. [4] After a few years of traveling back to Los Angeles to see Golde and to have samples taken of bone marrow, blood, and semen, Moore asked about transferring his care to a doctor closer to home. In response, Golde offered to cover the expense of Moore's airfare and accommodations in Los Angeles, and Moore agreed to continue. [3]

In 1983, Moore became suspicious about a new consent form he was asked to sign that said, "I (do, do not) voluntarily grant to the University of California all rights I, or my heirs, may have in any cell line or any other potential product which might be developed from the blood and/or bone marrow obtained from me". Moore initially signed the consent but refused at later visits and eventually gave the form to an attorney, who then discovered a patent on Moore's cell line, dubbed "Mo", which had been issued to the regents of UCLA in 1984. It named Golde and his research assistant as the inventors. [4] Under an agreement with Genetics Institute, Golde became a paid consultant and acquired the rights to 75,000 shares of common stock in the patent. Genetics Institute also agreed to pay Golde and the regents at least $330,000 over three years, in exchange for exclusive access to the materials and research performed on the cell line and products derived from it.[ citation needed ]

Lawsuit

After learning of the patent, Moore filed a lawsuit for a share in the potential profits from products or research that had been derived from his cell line, without his knowledge or consent. Moore's lawsuit alleged that Golde had been aware of the potential for financial benefit when medical consent was obtained, but he had concealed that from Moore. The claim was rejected by the Los Angeles Superior Court, but in 1988, the California Court of Appeal ruled that blood and tissue samples were one's own personal property and that patients could have a right to share in profits derived from them. [5]

According to the Los Angeles Times, "Moore later negotiated what he called a 'token' settlement with UCLA that covered his legal fees based on the fact that he wasn't informed and hadn't agreed to the research." [5]

Parties to the dispute

Moore brought suit against defendants Dr. David W. Golde, a physician who attended Moore at UCLA Medical Center; the Regents of the University of California, who own and operate the university; Shirley G. Quan, a researcher employed by the Regents; Genetics Institute, Inc.; and Sandoz Pharmaceuticals Corporation and related entities.

Decision

The court found that Moore had no property rights to his discarded cells or to any profits made from them. However, the research physician had an obligation to reveal his financial interest in the materials that were harvested from Moore, who could thus bring a claim for any injury that he sustained by the physician's failure to disclose his interests.

The opinion, written by Justice Edward Panelli, was joined by three of the seven judges of the Supreme Court of California.

The majority opinion first looked at Moore's claim of property interests under existing law. The court first rejected the argument that a person has an absolute right to the unique products of their body, as his products were not unique, as the cells are "no more unique to Moore than the number of vertebrae in the spine or the chemical formula of hemoglobin". [6]

The court then rejected the argument that his spleen should be protected as property to protect Moore's privacy and dignity. The court held that his interests were already protected by informed consent and decided that since laws required the destruction of human organs as some indication, the legislature had intended to prevent patients from possessing their extracted organs. Finally, the property at issue may not have been Moore's cells but the cell line created from his cells.

The court then looked at the policy behind having Moore's cells considered property. Because conversion of property is a strict liability tort, the court feared that extending property rights to include organs would have a chilling effect on medical research. Laboratories doing research receive a large volume of medical samples and cannot be expected to know or discover whether somewhere down the line their samples were illegally converted. Furthermore, Moore's interest in his bodily integrity and privacy are protected by the requirement of informed consent, which must also inform about economic interests.

Justice Arabian wrote a concurring opinion, stating that the deep philosophical, moral and religious issues presented by the case could not be decided by the court.

Justice Broussard concurred in part and dissented in part.

Justice Mosk dissented, stating that Moore could have been denied some property rights and given others. At the very least, Moore had the "right to do with his own tissue what the defendants did with it". That is, as soon as the tissue was removed, Moore had at least the right to choose to sell it to a laboratory or to have it destroyed. Thus, there would be no necessity to hold labs strictly liable for conversion when property rights could be broken up, to allow Moore to extract a significant portion of the economic value created by his tissue. Furthermore, to prove damages from informed consent, Moore would have to have proved that if he were properly informed, neither he, nor a reasonable person would have consented to the procedure. Thus, Moore's chances of proving damages through informed consent were slim. Also, he could not consent to the procedure but reserve the right to sell his organs. Finally, Moore could sue only his doctor, nobody else, for failing to adequately inform him. Thus, he was unlikely to win, could not extract the economic value of his tissue even if he had refused consent, and could not sue the parties that might be exploiting him.

Aftermath

Moore's cancer went into remission from 1976 to 1996 following the removal of his spleen. He died from the cancer in October 2001. [7]

The Michael Crichton book Next , while specifically mentioning the case, extrapolates its possible legal ramifications with a patient called Frank Burnet. Further, the 2010 book The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks by Rebecca Skloot and its 2017 film adaptation discuss this case and its precedent with regards to the Lacks Family.

See also

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Spleen</span> Immune organ that filters blood

The spleen is an organ found in almost all vertebrates. Similar in structure to a large lymph node, it acts primarily as a blood filter. The word spleen comes from Ancient Greek σπλήν (splḗn).

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Pathology</span> Study of the causes and effects of disease or injury, and how they arise

Pathology is the study of disease. The word pathology also refers to the study of disease in general, incorporating a wide range of biology research fields and medical practices. However, when used in the context of modern medical treatment, the term is often used in a narrower fashion to refer to processes and tests that fall within the contemporary medical field of "general pathology", an area that includes a number of distinct but inter-related medical specialties that diagnose disease, mostly through analysis of tissue and human cell samples. Idiomatically, "a pathology" may also refer to the predicted or actual progression of particular diseases. The suffix pathy is sometimes used to indicate a state of disease in cases of both physical ailment and psychological conditions. A physician practicing pathology is called a pathologist.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Informed consent</span> Ethical precondition for obtaining voluntary assumption of risk

Informed consent is a principle in medical ethics, medical law, media studies, and other fields, that a person must have sufficient information and understanding before making decisions about accepting risk, such as their medical care. Pertinent information may include risks and benefits of treatments, alternative treatments, the patient's role in treatment, and their right to refuse treatment. In most systems, healthcare providers have a legal and ethical responsibility to ensure that a patient's consent is informed. This principle applies more broadly than healthcare intervention, for example to conduct research, to disclose a person's medical information, or to participate in high risk sporting and recreational activities.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Blood cell</span> Cell produced by hematopoiesis

A blood cell is a cell produced through hematopoiesis and found mainly in the blood. Major types of blood cells include red blood cells (erythrocytes), white blood cells (leukocytes), and platelets (thrombocytes). Together, these three kinds of blood cells add up to a total 45% of the blood tissue by volume, with the remaining 55% of the volume composed of plasma, the liquid component of blood.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Lymphatic system</span> Organ system in vertebrates complementary to the circulatory system

The lymphatic system, or lymphoid system, is an organ system in vertebrates that is part of the immune system and complementary to the circulatory system. It consists of a large network of lymphatic vessels, lymph nodes, lymphoid organs, lymphatic tissue and lymph. Lymph is a clear fluid carried by the lymphatic vessels back to the heart for re-circulation. The Latin word for lymph, lympha, refers to the deity of fresh water, "Lympha".

Medical ethics is an applied branch of ethics which analyzes the practice of clinical medicine and related scientific research. Medical ethics is based on a set of values that professionals can refer to in the case of any confusion or conflict. These values include the respect for autonomy, non-maleficence, beneficence, and justice. Such tenets may allow doctors, care providers, and families to create a treatment plan and work towards the same common goal. These four values are not ranked in order of importance or relevance and they all encompass values pertaining to medical ethics. However, a conflict may arise leading to the need for hierarchy in an ethical system, such that some moral elements overrule others with the purpose of applying the best moral judgement to a difficult medical situation. Medical ethics is particularly relevant in decisions regarding involuntary treatment and involuntary commitment.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Henrietta Lacks</span> African-American woman (1920–1951), source of HeLa immortal cell line

Henrietta Lacks was an African-American woman whose cancer cells are the source of the HeLa cell line, the first immortalized human cell line and one of the most important cell lines in medical research. An immortalized cell line reproduces indefinitely under specific conditions, and the HeLa cell line continues to be a source of invaluable medical data to the present day.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">HeLa</span> Oldest cultured human cell line (1951)

HeLa is an immortalized cell line used in scientific research. It is the oldest human cell line and one of the most commonly used. HeLa cells are durable and prolific, allowing for extensive applications in scientific study. The line is derived from cervical cancer cells taken on February 8, 1951, from Henrietta Lacks, a 31-year-old African American mother of five, after whom the line is named. Lacks died of cancer on October 4, 1951.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Splenectomy</span> Surgical removal of the spleen

A splenectomy is the surgical procedure that partially or completely removes the spleen. The spleen is an important organ in regard to immunological function due to its ability to efficiently destroy encapsulated bacteria. Therefore, removal of the spleen runs the risk of overwhelming post-splenectomy infection, a medical emergency and rapidly fatal disease caused by the inability of the body's immune system to properly fight infection following splenectomy or asplenia.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">William Holmes Crosby Jr.</span> American physician (1914–2005)

William Holmes Crosby Jr. was an American soldier, translator and physician. He is considered by many to be one of the founding fathers of modern hematology. He published more the 450 peer-reviewed papers in the field, as well as those of oncology, gastroenterology, iron metabolism, nutrition and general medical practice. In addition he was an inventor and published translator of poetry.

<i>Schloendorff v. Society of New York Hospital</i>

Schloendorff v. Society of New York Hospital, 105 N.E. 92, was a decision issued by the New York Court of Appeals in 1914 which established principles of respondeat superior in United States law.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">B-cell prolymphocytic leukemia</span> Medical condition

B-cell prolymphocytic leukemia, referred to as B-PLL, is a rare blood cancer. It is a more aggressive, but still treatable, form of leukemia.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Biobank</span> Repository of biological samples used for research

A biobank is a type of biorepository that stores biological samples for use in research. Biobanks have become an important resource in medical research, supporting many types of contemporary research like genomics and personalized medicine.

A Clinical Research Coordinator (CRC) is a person responsible for conducting clinical trials using good clinical practice (GCP) under the auspices of a Principal Investigator (PI).

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Ronald Reagan UCLA Medical Center</span> Hospital in Los Angeles, California

Ronald Reagan UCLA Medical Center is a hospital located on the campus of the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA), in Westwood, Los Angeles, California, United States. It is currently ranked by U.S. News & World Report, as the best in California and the West Coast. The hospital provides tertiary care to Los Angeles and the surrounding communities.

Chester Milton Southam was an immunologist and oncologist at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center and Cornell University Medical College; he went to Thomas Jefferson University in 1971 and worked there until the end of his career. He ran many experiments involving the injection of live cancer cells into human subjects, without disclosing that they were cancer cells, and using subjects with questionable ability to consent, such as incarcerated people and senile patients in long-term care at a hospital. The New York State Attorney General encouraged the Board of Regents of the University of the State of New York to take away Southam's medical license. Regardless, he went on to be president of the American Association for Cancer Research. His work was labeled by both modern scientists and his contemporaries as highly dangerous and unethical.

Christiane Völling is the first intersex person known to have successfully sued for damages in a case brought for non-consensual surgical intervention described as a non-consensual sex reassignment. She was awarded €100,000 by the Regional Court of Cologne.

Owen Witte is an American physician-scientist at the University of California, Los Angeles. He is a University Professor of microbiology, immunology and molecular genetics in the David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, founding director emeritus of the UCLA Eli and Edythe Broad Center of Regenerative Medicine and Stem Cell Research, and the UC Regents’ David Saxon Presidential Chair in developmental immunology (1989–present). Witte is also a Howard Hughes Medical Institute investigator (1986–2016) and a member of the President's Cancer Panel, the National Academy of Sciences, the National Academy of Medicine, the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, and the Cancer Research Academy of the AACR. He serves on numerous editorial boards and scientific advisory boards for academic centers and biotechnology companies.

<i>Salgo v. Leland Stanford Jr. University Board of Trustees</i> 1957 U.S. court case establishing "informed consent"

Salgo v. Leland Stanford Jr. University Board of Trustees was a 1957 court case that helped to establish what the practice of informed consent was supposed to look like in the practice of modern medicine. This was evaluated with respect to the California Court of Appeals case where Martin Salgo sued the trustees of Stanford University and Stanford physician Dr. Frank Gerbode for malpractice as he claimed that they did not inform him nor his family of the details and risks associated with an aortogram which left him permanently paralyzed in his lower extremities.

Havasupai Tribe v. the Arizona Board of Regents was a legal court case involving the American Indian Havasupai tribe and the Arizona State University Board of Regents.

References

  1. ↑ Sandra Blakeslee (July 10, 1990). "Patient's Right to Tissue Is Limited". New York Times .
  2. ↑ Epstein & Sharkey (2016), p. 560.
  3. 1 2 Skloot, Rebecca (April 16, 2006), "Taking the Least of You. The Tissue-Industrial Complex", The New York Times Magazine, retrieved August 5, 2016
  4. 1 2 3 Skloot, Rebecca (2010), The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks , New York City: Random House, p.  199–206, ISBN   978-1-4000-5217-2
  5. 1 2 3 McLellan, Dennis (October 13, 2001), "Obituaries: John Moore, 56; Sued to Share Profits From His Cells", Los Angeles Times, retrieved August 5, 2016
  6. ↑ Moore v. Regents of the University of California. 793 P.2d 479 at 490 (Cal. 1990)
  7. ↑ "John Moore, 56; Sued to Share Profits From His Cells". Los Angeles Times. October 13, 2001. Retrieved January 9, 2021.

Sources

This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.