McFall v. Shimp
Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas
10 Pa. D. & C. 3d 90 (1978)
- Written by Angela Patrick, JD
Facts
Robert McFall (plaintiff) needed a bone-marrow transplant, likely from a close relative, in order to live. A search revealed that the only compatible donor was McFall’s cousin, David Shimp (defendant). Even though healthy bone-marrow donors were generally able to regrow their marrow after donating, Shimp did not agree to donate his marrow to McFall. Shimp said that he was concerned about anesthesia, lasting aches and pain, and whether chemical exposures at work might have impaired his ability to regenerate his marrow. McFall sued to compel Shimp to submit to further testing and to donate his bone marrow to McFall. McFall argued that society may infringe on a person’s bodily security if that is the only way to save another person’s life.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Flaherty, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 810,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 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.
