Deborah S. Brotherton v. Frank P. Cleveland, 923 F.2d 477 (6th Cir. 1991)

CASE: Woman sues for wrongful removal of her dead husband's corneas.

FACTS: After her husband was found dead in a car, his body was taken to a hospital. His wife expressly forbade the hospital from harvesting her husbands organs, saying he had an aversion to such an anatomical gift. Because his death was a suspected suicide, his body was taken for examination by the coroner, who permitted the man's corneas to be removed. State law permits a coroner to remove the corneas of autopsy patients without consent, provided that the coroner had no knowledge of an objection by the decedent, the decedent's next of kin. Though the coroner was never informed of Mrs. Brotherton's views as the tissue harvesting, it was clearly stated on the report of death given to him. Further, it is the custom and practice of the coroner's office to not obtain a next of kin's consent or to inspect the medical records or hospital documents before removing corneas. The plaintiff brough suit under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, alleging that her husband's corneas were removed without due process of law and in violation of the equal protection clause. Her claim was dismissed by the trial court; she appealed to the Sixth Circuit.

COURT SAYS: Dismissal reversed.

HOLDING: Trial court erred in dismissing wife's claim that her dead husband's corneas were taken under color of state law without due process of law because she had a legitimate claim of entitlement in his body, protected by the due process clause of the fourteenth amendment.

RATIONALE:

• Under Ohio law, the plaintiff had an express right to control the disposal of her husband's body.
• Under Ohio case law, the plaintiff had a possessory right to her husband's body.
• Uner Ohio case law, the plaintiff had a claim for disturbance of his body.
• The coroner's office took advantage of the state law by customarily removing corneas before inspecting records or receiving consent.

DISSENT: The actions of the coroner did not amount to a taking of property protected by the Civil Rights Act; rather, the statute, intended to encouage the harvestation of corneas, gives the coroner the right to take corneas in the absence of knowledge of an objection.

T O P