Regents of University of California v. Superior Court

I respectfully dissent.

The majority relies on Conroy v. Regents of University of California (2009) 45 Cal.4th 1244 [ 91 Cal.Rptr.3d 532 , 203 P.3d 1127 ] (Conroy) in holding that representations made to plaintiffs concerning the use and disposition of the decedent’s body created no duty of care as a matter of law. I believe that Conroy does not support the majority’s holding and is not dispositive as to the existence or nonexistence of a duty of care arising from representations made outside of the donation agreement.

The decedent in Conroy, supra, 45 Cal.4th 1244 , signed an agreement donating his body to the Willed Body Program at the University of California at Irvine (UCI). The agreement stated that the donation was “ ‘for teaching purposes, scientific research, or such purposes as the said University or its authorized representative shall in their sole discretion deem advisable.’ ” (Id. at pp. 1247-1248.) It also stated, “ ‘that final disposition of my body by UCI shall be in accordance with the State Code.’ ” {Id. at p. 1248.) The agreement contained no other express limitation on the use or disposition of the decedent’s body. The plaintiff alleged that UCI’s agents had…

INTRODUCTION

Plaintiffs Chiquita Waters, Tami Waters, and Victor Waters are the children of Ruth Waters, who enrolled in the University of California at Los Angeles (UCLA) “Willed Body Program” in 1970 and whose body was donated to that program upon her death in 2001. Plaintiffs sued the Regents of the University of California (the Regents) for negligence because of alleged wrongdoing and mishandling of donated bodies by the UCLA Willed Body Program.

Based on the recent California Supreme Court case of Conroy v. Regents of University of California (2009) 45 Cal.4th 1244 [ 91 Cal.Rptr.3d 532 , 203 P.3d 1127 ] (Conroy), we find that the document of gift executed by Ruth Waters gave UCLA the right to use her body for teaching purposes, scientific research, “or such purposes as [UCLA] shall in [its] sole discretion deem advisable.” That document of gift contained no provision regarding disposition of her body or remains, and representations made by the UCLA Willed Body Program to plaintiffs did not create additional duties owed to *758 them. Under Conroy , execution of a document of gift causes the statutory right to control disposition of a donor’s remains to pass to the…

Kiesel Boucher Larson, Raymond P. Boucher, Michael Eyerly; Arias, Ozzello & Gignac, Mick M. Arias and Arnold C. Wang for Real Parties In Interest.

Plaintiffs Chiquita Waters, Tami Waters, and Victor Waters are the children of Ruth Waters, who enrolled in the University of California at Los Angeles (UCLA) "Willed Body Program" in 1970 and whose body was donated to that program upon her death in 2001. Plaintiffs sued the Regents of the University of California (the Regents) for negligence because of alleged wrongdoing and mishandling of donated bodies by the UCLA Willed Body Program.

(1) Based on the recent California Supreme Court case of Conroy v. Regents of University of California (2009) 45 Cal.4th 1244 [ 91 Cal.Rptr.3d 532 , 203 P.3d 1127 ] ( Conroy ), we find that the document of gift executed by Ruth Waters gave UCLA the right to use her body for teaching purposes, scientific research, "or such purposes as [UCLA] shall in [its] sole discretion deem advisable." That document of gift contained no provision regarding disposition of her body or remains, and representations made by the UCLA Willed Body Program to plaintiffs did not create additional duties owed…