In Re Duran
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
1Opinion of the Court
KELLY, J:
¶ 1 Appellant, Larry M. Johnson, asks us to determine whether the trial court erred when it appointed an emergency guardian for the express purpose of consenting to a blood transfusion for Maria Duran (“Maria”), a Jehovah’s Witness. We hold that Appellant’s issue is cognizable despite its technical mootness. We further hold that Maria’s unequivocal refusal of blood transfusion therapy is protected by Pennsylvania common law and that the trial court erred when it appointed an emergency guardian to abridge this right. Finally, we conclude that Appellant was entitled to notice of the…
2Cases cited25 opinions
- Rescue Army v. Municipal Court of Los AngelesSupreme Court of the United States · 1947
- Union Pacific Railway Co. v. BotsfordSupreme Court of the United States · 1891
- Schloendorff v. Society of the New York HospitalNew York Court of Appeals · 1914
- Harman Ex Rel. Harman v. BorahSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2000
- Superintendent of Belchertown State School v. SaikewiczMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1977
20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by49 opinions
- In the Interest of R.D.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 2012
- In re D.A.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 2002
- Step Plan Services, Inc. v. KoreskoSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2010
- J.S. v. WhetzelSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2004
- First Union National Bank v. F.A. Realty Investors Corp.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 2002
44 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.