Speck v. Finegold
Pennsylvania Superior Court
268 Pa. Super. 342, 408 A.2d 496 (1979)
- Written by Sarah Hoffman, JD
Facts
Frank Speck and his two children had neurofibromatosis, a crippling and disfiguring disease. In order to avoid passing the disease to more children, Frank and his wife, Dorothy (plaintiffs), agreed that Frank would get a vasectomy. Dr. Finegold (defendant) performed the vasectomy. He assured the Specks that it had been successful and that Frank was sterile. However, Dorothy got pregnant again. To avoid the baby developing neurofibromatosis, the Specks decided to have an abortion. Dr. Schwartz (defendant) performed the abortion and repeatedly said it had been successful. Soon after, Dorothy gave birth to a premature baby who had neurofibromatosis. The Specks sued both doctors for negligence and breach of contract. These claims were brought on behalf of their infant child for wrongful life, on behalf of the Specks for damages related to medical care for their child, and for nonmonetary damages of emotional disturbance and mental stress. The trial court found in favor of Dr. Schwartz and Dr. Finegold on the grounds that there was no cause of action for the wrongful life or birth of a child.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Cercone, J.)
Concurrence/Dissent (Spaeth, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 806,000 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.
