Abigail Ginsberg v. Quest Diagnostics, Incorporated (076288)
147 A.3d 434
| N.J. | 2016Background
- Plaintiffs Tamar and Ari Ginsberg (then New York domiciliaries) sued after their daughter Abigail was born with Tay‑Sachs and later died; plaintiffs claim negligent genetic testing/advice deprived them of the opportunity to obtain prenatal testing and terminate the pregnancy (wrongful birth, wrongful life, negligence, malpractice).
- Defendants include Quest Diagnostics (New York lab, corporate parent in New Jersey), Mount Sinai (New York hospital; third‑party defendant), and several New Jersey‑domiciled medical providers (Dr. Rubenstein, Judith Durcan, Hackensack Univ. Medical Center, Genetics Service).
- New Jersey and New York recognize wrongful birth claims but differ sharply on recoverable damages: New Jersey permits parental emotional damages and special medical expenses; New York limits recovery to pecuniary care/treatment costs and bars emotional damages.
- Trial court applied Restatement (Second) of Conflict of Laws §§ 146, 145, and 6 and concluded New Jersey (place of injury) law governed all defendants.
- Appellate Division reversed: it found New York was the place of injury, applied the Restatement contacts, and adopted a defendant‑by‑defendant choice‑of‑law analysis—holding New Jersey law governed claims against the New Jersey defendants but New York law governed claims against Quest and Mount Sinai.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether a single state’s law must govern all defendants or courts may do a defendant‑by‑defendant choice‑of‑law analysis when defendants are domiciled in different states | Ginsberg argued New Jersey law should apply (including to Quest) so plaintiffs can pursue emotional damages and special expenses | Defendants (Quest, Mount Sinai, New York and New Jersey defendants) argued New York law should govern the entire case | Court held courts may and, in most cases, should undertake a defendant‑by‑defendant Restatement analysis; affirmed App. Div. split application (NJ law for NJ defendants; NY law for Quest/Mount Sinai) |
| Proper identification of the place of injury under Restatement § 146 | Plaintiffs argued New Jersey was place of injury (their current domicile; place of injury elements tied to child’s life and parental residence) | Defendants argued New York was place of injury (plaintiffs lived in NY during pregnancy; testing, potential termination, and birth occurred there) | Appellate Division and this Court accepted New York as the place of injury for presumption purposes, but the presumption was overcome for NJ defendants under §145/§6 contacts |
| Whether Restatement §145 and §6 contacts require looking at defendants individually | Plaintiffs argued aggregate analysis should govern to avoid complexity and inconsistent results | Defendants argued a single‑state rule is required for fairness and predictability | Court held Restatement §145(2) and §6 contemplate defendant‑specific contacts (domicile, place of conduct, relationship), so a defendant‑by‑defendant inquiry is appropriate though trial courts retain discretion to apply one state's law in very complex cases |
| Concern about disproportionate liability to NJ defendants if NJ law (allowing emotional damages) applies | Plaintiffs asserted full recovery under applicable law | NJ defendants feared being saddled with emotional damages disproportionate to their fault | Court explained New Jersey’s Comparative Negligence Act requires molding the verdict and allocating damages by percentage fault, limiting any NJ defendant’s share of non‑economic damages accordingly |
Key Cases Cited
- P.V. ex rel. T.V. v. Camp Jaycee, 197 N.J. 132 (New Jersey 2008) (adopts Restatement three‑step choice‑of‑law approach in personal injury cases)
- Erny v. Estate of Merola, 171 N.J. 86 (New Jersey 2002) (uses Restatement factors in choice‑of‑law analysis)
- Fu v. Fu, 160 N.J. 108 (New Jersey 1999) (evaluates Restatement contacts and policies)
- Canesi ex rel. Canesi v. Wilson, 158 N.J. 490 (New Jersey 1999) (defines wrongful birth recovery under New Jersey law)
- Becker v. Schwartz, 386 N.E.2d 807 (N.Y. 1978) (limits wrongful birth damages to pecuniary expenses under New York law)
- Ginsberg ex rel. Ginsberg v. Quest Diagnostics, Inc., 441 N.J. Super. 198 (App. Div. 2015) (Appellate Division opinion adopting defendant‑by‑defendant choice‑of‑law and allocating NY law to Quest/Mount Sinai and NJ law to NJ defendants)