Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Donna Ays FASANO, et al., Plaintiffs-Respondents, v. Lilian D. NASH, et al., Defendants, “John” Obasaju, etc., Defendant-Appellant.
Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Diane Lebedeff, J.), entered on or about March 7, 2000, which, in an action arising out of defendants' mistaken implantation of another woman's embryo into plaintiff's uterus, insofar as appealed from, denied defendant-appellant embryologist's motion to dismiss the complaint as against him for failure to state a cause of action, unanimously affirmed, without costs.
Plaintiffs allege that appellant's negligence in mixing up the embryos caused them to suffer physical and emotional injuries, namely, the need to undergo a Caesarean section due to a twin pregnancy, and the need to make difficult decisions as to whether to carry the fetus that was not theirs to term and whether to give the child up to his biological parents. That such decisions involved a birth does not necessarily require dismissal of the action (see, Perry-Rogers v. Fasano, 282 A.D.2d 231, 723 N.Y.S.2d 28; cf., Lynch v. Bay Ridge Obstetrical & Gynecological Assocs., 72 N.Y.2d 632, 635-636, 536 N.Y.S.2d 11, 532 N.E.2d 1239; Martinez v. Long Is. Jewish Hillside Med. Ctr., 70 N.Y.2d 697, 518 N.Y.S.2d 955, 512 N.E.2d 538; Becker v. Schwartz, 46 N.Y.2d 401, 412-415, 413 N.Y.S.2d 895, 386 N.E.2d 807). We have considered appellant's other arguments, including that the chain of causation between his alleged negligence and any post-delivery emotional injuries plaintiffs suffered was broken by plaintiffs' post-delivery actions, and find them unavailing on this motion to dismiss for failure to state a cause of action.
Thank you for your feedback!
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Decided: April 12, 2001
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)