Montana Supreme Court
224 P.3d 1211 (2009)
Robert Baxter (plaintiff), who suffered from a terminal illness, and others filed suit against the State of Montana (the State) (defendant), challenging the constitutionality of the state’s homicide statutes as applied to physicians who provide aid in dying to mentally competent, terminally ill patients. Baxter was in persistent and significant pain. Consequently, Baxter wanted the option of ingesting a lethal dose of medication prescribed by his physician at a time of his choosing. Baxter’s suit alleged that terminally ill patients had a right to die with dignity under the Montana Constitution, Article II, Sections 4 and 10, which address individual dignity and privacy. The trial court agreed and granted Baxter’s motion for summary judgment. The State appealed.
Rule of Law
Holding and Reasoning (Leaphart, J.)
Concurrence (Nelson, J.)
Dissent (Rice, J.)
What to do next…
Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.
You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 97,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Vanderbilt, Berkeley, and the University of Illinois—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students. Read our student testimonials.
Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.
Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students. Read more about Quimbee.
Here's why 221,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 14,100 briefs, keyed to 189 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.