Logourl black
From our private database of 14,000+ case briefs...

In re Eichner

New York Court of Appeals
420 N.E.2d 64 (1981)


Facts

Joseph Fox, member of the Roman Catholic clergy, suffered a heart attack resulting in the loss of oxygen and damage to his brain. He was placed on a respirator which controlled his breathing. He subsequently lapsed into a vegetative state. The attending physician informed Father Philip Eichner (plaintiff) that there was no reasonable chance of Fox recovering. After two neurosurgeons confirmed Fox’s diagnosis, Eichner requested that the hospital remove the respirator, but the hospital refused without a court order. It was well known that Fox would not have wanted to be on a respirator in his current state. He had formally discussed his personal views during talks about the moral implications of removing the ventilator in the famous Karen Quinlan case. At that time, Fox agreed that he would not want any extraordinary measures taken if he were in a persistent vegetative state with no chance of recovery. Eichner petitioned to be the guardian of Fox, which was supported by all of Fox’s living relatives. At a hearing, the District Attorney opposed Eichner’s application to remove the respirator citing that there may be a chance for some improvement in Fox’s condition. However, all medical experts agreed that there was no reasonable likelihood that Fox would ever emerge from a vegetative coma. The order of the lower court was stayed pending appeal. In the interim, Fox died despite medical measures to sustain his life.

Rule of Law

The rule of law is the black letter law upon which the court rested its decision.

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Issue

The issue section includes the dispositive legal issue in the case phrased as a question.

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Holding and Reasoning (Wachtler, J.)

The holding and reasoning section includes:

  • A "yes" or "no" answer to the question framed in the issue section;
  • A summary of the majority or plurality opinion, using the CREAC method; and
  • The procedural disposition (e.g. reversed and remanded, affirmed, etc.).

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

What to do next…

  1. 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.

  2. 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 204,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 14,000 briefs, keyed to 188 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.