Laboratory Corporation of America v. Hood
Court of Appeals of Maryland
395 Md. 608, 911 A.2d 841 (2006)
Facts
Laboratory Corporation of America and Laboratory Corporation of America Holdings (LabCorp) were North Carolina corporations in the business of providing medical-testing services. Maryland residents Karen and Scott Hood (plaintiffs) received testing services from LabCorp related to Karen’s pregnancy. LabCorp misread a report in North Carolina indicating that Karen’s unborn child did not have cystic fibrosis, a severe genetic disease. After LabCorp’s faulty assessment, the Hoods’ son, Luke, was born with cystic fibrosis. The Hoods filed a wrongful-birth suit in federal district court for the district of Maryland. The district court applied the substantive law of Maryland to the case, reasoning that Maryland was the state in which the last event required to give rise to the tort occurred. LabCorp argued that the standard-of-care exception in § 380(2) of the Restatement (First) of Conflicts of Law applied, and the exception required the district court to consider North Carolina law to determine whether its employees breached a duty owed to the Hoods. The district court certified two questions to the Court of Appeals of Maryland: (1) whether the district court should apply the standard-of-care exception, and (2) whether denying a Maryland resident’s wrongful-birth claim by applying North Carolina law would violate the public policy of Maryland.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Wilner, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 708,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 44,500 briefs, keyed to 983 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.
