Thomas Jefferson University v. Romer
Florida District Court of Appeal
710 So. 2d 67 (1998)
- Written by Liz Nakamura, JD
Facts
Dr. Tocci, the director of biogenetics at the University of Miami (UM) (defendant), took a blood sample from the mother of a child born with Tay-Sachs disease to check whether the mother was a carrier of the Tay-Sachs gene. Tay-Sachs is a rare, neurodegenerative, genetic disorder that typically results in death. Because of temporary staffing shortages at UM, Tocci sent the mother’s blood sample, along with a small selection of other samples, to Thomas Jefferson University (TJU) (plaintiff) in Pennsylvania for processing. There was no formal contract between UM and TJU, and there was no expectation that TJU would continue to process blood samples for UM on an ongoing basis. TJU furnished all reports to UM, and UM communicated the results to the patients in the ordinary course of business. TJU’s analysis and report on the mother’s blood sample incorrectly indicated that the mother was not a carrier of the Tay-Sachs gene and could safely have more children. The mother sued TJU and UM for negligence based on the incorrect test and report. The mother claimed jurisdiction over TJU under Florida’s long-arm statute. TJU moved to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction. The trial court denied TJU’s motion, holding that (1) Florida had statutory long-arm jurisdiction over TJU because TJU’s negligent conduct in Pennsylvania caused the mother injury in Florida; and (2) TJU had sufficient minimum contacts with Florida to satisfy constitutional due-process requirements. TJU appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Per curiam)
Dissent (Farmer, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 811,000 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.