Knight v. Penobscot Bay Medical Center
Maine Supreme Judicial Court
420 A.2d 915 (1980)

- Written by Miller Jozwiak, JD
Facts
William and Kathleen Knight (plaintiffs) went to Penobscot Bay Medical Center (hospital) (defendant) when Kathleen was expected to give birth. Dr. Albert Lantinen (defendant) and a nurse, Sandra Robie (defendant), were assigned to the birth. Sandra was working late because another nurse was delayed in relieving Sandra. Accordingly, when Sandra’s husband, Theodore Robie (defendant), arrived to drive Sandra home, he had to wait. To give Theodore something to do while he waited, Lantinen allowed him to watch a birth. Lantinen initially had Theodore watch a particular birth, but when complications arose, he had Theodore watch Kathleen’s birth. Theodore watched through a viewing window and did not see the actual process of delivery. Sandra and Theodore later testified that they thought they had authorization to observe the birth. Similarly, Lantinen testified that he did not intend to intrude on the Knights’ privacy. The Knights sued the hospital, Lantinen, and the Robies for, among other things, invasion of privacy. At trial, the Knights requested a jury instruction stating that the Knights had a legal right to privacy in the delivery room, which others could not violate unless intrusion was necessary and with consent. The trial court refused to give the instruction. The jury returned a verdict for the hospital, and the Knights appealed, claiming that the court erroneously denied the instruction.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Wernick, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,500 briefs, keyed to 994 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.