Maryland's high court rules 'wrongful birth' claim governed by state law that ensures remedy

A "wrongful birth" claim brought by Maryland parents against a North Carolina laboratory must be governed by Maryland law if applying the law of the defendant's state would deprive the plaintiffs of a remedy, Maryland's highest court has ruled in answering a certified question.

The plaintiffs' child was diagnosed with cystic fibrosis when he was two. They filed a wrongful birth claim in U.S. District Court in Maryland, alleging that the defendant, a North Carolina laboratory, misread amniotic fluid samples and erroneously reported that their child would not be affected by the disease.

Maryland law recognizes a cause of action for wrongful birth. A decision from the North Carolina Supreme Court suggests that it would not recognize the plaintiffs' cause of action, although the courts of that state apparently have not decided the viability of the precise claim in this case.

The plaintiffs argued that Maryland law governed their claim because the injury occurred in Maryland, where their son was born.

The defendant contended that North Carolina law applied because its potential liability flowed from the issuance of the allegedly erroneous lab report and, therefore, any breach of a standard of care occurred in that state.

But the Maryland high court recognized a public policy exception to the general rule that the law of the place where the wrongful conduct occurred applies.

"[W]hen prospective parents, relying on the negligent act or omission of a health care professional, elect to continue a pregnancy that they otherwise would have lawfully terminated and, as a result, are burdened with the cost and expense of raising a child with a serious genetic or other physical or mental defect, they have been injured and have a right to seek damages for that injury from the person whose negligence led to the injury. That right is a matter of important public policy in this state, flowing not only from this court's considered view but as well from statute. We thus conclude that, if application of North Carolina law would preclude this cause of action on the ground that no injury has occurred, we would hold that aspect of North Carolina law to be contrary to clear, strong, and important Maryland public policy and would not apply it," the court said.

Laboratory Corp. Of America v. Hood (Lawyers USA No. 9934806) Maryland Court of Appeals No.1, September Term, 2006. Dec. 1, 2006.