''Greenberg v. Miami Children's Hospital Research Institute'', 264 F. Supp. 2d 1064 (S.D. Fla. 2003), was a decision by the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida which ruled that individuals do not own their tissue samples when researchers take them for testing.

History

The plaintiffs in this case were a group of parents of children who had Canavan disease and three non-profit organizations who developed a confidential Canavan disease registry and database. The parents provided their children's tissue for research on the disease and the non-profit groups aided in the identification of other affected families. The defendant was Reuben Matalon, who received these tissue samples and used them to isolate and patent the Canavan gene sequence. He subsequently developed a genetic screening test for it and began claiming

royalties A royalty payment is a payment made by one party to another that owns a particular asset, for the right to ongoing use of that asset. Royalties are typically agreed upon as a percentage of gross or net revenues derived from the use of an asset o ...

whenever the test was used. The Miami facilities where he did his research, including

Miami Children's Hospital Nicklaus Children's Hospital formerly known as Miami Children's Hospital is a hospital for children in South Florida. The hospital has 289 beds. It is affiliated with the FIU Herbert Wertheim College of Medicine, Nova Southeastern University, and ...

, were also defendants.

Decision

The court dismissed the plaintiffs' claims that the defendants did not provide

informed consent Informed consent is a principle in medical ethics and medical law, that a patient must have sufficient information and understanding before making decisions about their medical care. Pertinent information may include risks and benefits of treatme ...

, conducted a

breach of fiduciary duties A fiduciary is a person who holds a Law, legal or ethical relationship of Trust (social sciences), trust with one or more other Party (law), parties (person or group of persons). Typically, a fiduciary prudently takes care of money or other asset ...

, concealed the patent, and misappropriated trade secrets. The court did uphold the plaintiffs' claim of unjust enrichment at the expense of the donors of tissue, writing that "the facts paint a picture of a continuing research collaboration that involved plaintiffs also investing time and significant resources."

Significance

The case set a precedent for determining ownership of donated tissue samples.

References

External links

*
Canavan Foundation's press release
{{Medical ethics cases 2003 in Florida 2003 in United States case law United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida cases United States property case law Bioethics