Logourl black
From our private database of 14,100+ case briefs...

J.B. v. M.B.

Supreme Court of New Jersey
783 A.2d 707 (2001)


Facts

J. B. (plaintiff) was unable to conceive a child and underwent in vitro fertilization (IVF) at the Cooper Center (the Center) (defendant) using genetic material provided by her husband, M. B. (defendant). After the successful fertilization of 11 pre-embryos, four were implanted in J. B., and the remaining seven were cryopreserved. The consent form signed by J. B. and M. B. at the Center prior to them undergoing the IVF procedure provided that ownership of the preserved pre-embryos would be relinquished to the Center upon their divorce unless a trial court held otherwise. J. B. became pregnant and gave birth to a daughter. Later, J. B. filed for divorce from M. B. and expressly sought an order requesting that the seven preserved pre-embryos be destroyed. However, M. B. wanted the tissues to be implanted in J. B. or donated for use by other couples. J. B. moved for summary judgment on the pre-embryo issue. M. B. filed a cross-motion for summary judgment and claimed that J. B. and M. B. had an agreement that any unused pre-embryos would not be destroyed. The trial court granted the divorce and granted J. B.’s motion for summary judgment on the pre-embryo issue, concluding that J. B. had a greater interest in the preserved pre-embryos in terms of not procreating. M. B. appealed. The appellate division affirmed. The Supreme Court of New Jersey granted certiorari to review.

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 (Poritz, C.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.

Concurrence (Zazzali, J.)

The concurrence section is for members only and includes a summary of the concurring judge or justice’s opinion.

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

Concurrence (Verniero, J.)

The concurrence section is for members only and includes a summary of the concurring judge or justice’s opinion.

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 220,000 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.