40 Landmark Cases in Health Law That Changed Healthcare Practices

Patient Rights and Consent

Schloendorff v. Society of New York Hospital (1914)

Issue: Informed consent.

Outcome: Determined that patients have the right to determine what is done with their bodies.

Canterbury v. Spence (1972)

Issue: Duty to inform.

Also read:

Outcome: Held that physicians have a responsibility to disclose risks of medical procedures.

Cruzan v. Director, Missouri Department of Health (1990)

Issue: Right to refuse treatment.

Outcome: Established that a person has the right to forego life-sustaining treatment.

Tarasoff v. Regents of the University of California (1976)

Issue: Duty to warn.

Outcome: Healthcare providers have a duty to inform third parties of imminent dangers.

In re Quinlan (1976)

Issue: Treatment at end of life

Outcome: Court approved withdrawal of life support based on consent of family members.

Medical Malpractice

Hall v. Hilbun (1985)

Issue: Duty of care

Outcome: Established national standards for medical treatment in malpractice suits.

Helling v. Carey (1974)

Issue: Failure to perform diagnostic testing.

Outcome: Adopted liability in failing to conduct diagnostic testing.

Caparo Industries v. Dickman (1990)

Issue: Duty of care.

Result: Established the threshold of closeness to establish the element of negligence.

McCall v. United States (2014)

Problem: Tort damages caps

Result: Found non-economic damages caps unconstitutional in Florida

Nettles v. Gaddis (1998)

Problem: Medical malpractice regarding surgery

Result: Determined proper surgical practice

Healthcare Discrimination

Brown v. Board of Education (1954)

Problem: Racial separation

Result: Although it is an education case, it provides a basis to address the unequal treatment in health care.

Simkins v. Moses H. Cone Memorial Hospital (1963)

Problem: Racial healthcare discrimination.

Outcome: Prohibited federal funding for segregated hospitals.

Olmstead v. L.C. (1999)

Issue: Disability discrimination.

Outcome: Affirmed the rights of disabled individuals to community-based treatment.

Bragdon v. Abbott (1998)

Issue: HIV discrimination.

Outcome: Held that HIV is a disability under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA).

Burwell v. Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc. (2014)

Issue: Religious exemptions in healthcare.

Outcome: Permitted businesses to deny contraceptive coverage based on religious beliefs.

Reproductive Rights

Roe v. Wade (1973)

Issue: Abortion rights.

Outcome: Legalized abortion nationwide (overturned in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization in 2022).

Planned Parenthood v. Casey (1992)

Issue: Abortion regulations.

Outcome: Allowed states to impose restrictions that do not place an “undue burden” on women.

Whole Woman’s Health v. Hellerstedt (2016)

Issue: Abortion facility regulations.

Outcome: Struck down laws imposing unnecessary burdens on abortion providers.

Griswold v. Connecticut (1965)

Issue: Contraceptive rights.

Outcome: Legalized the use of contraceptives for married couples.

Zubik v. Burwell (2016)

Issue: Contraceptive mandates.

Result: Religious beliefs undergirding contraceptive coverage re-affirmed

Health Insurance and Access

National Federation of Independent Business v. Sebelius (2012)

Issue: Affordable Care Act (ACA).

Holding: Held that the ACA’s individual mandate was a tax and, thus, constitutional

King v. Burwell (2015)

Issue: Health insurance subsidies

Holding: Upheld ACA’s subsidies to individuals enrolled through federally facilitated exchanges

Rush Prudential HMO, Inc. v. Moran (2002)

Issue: Liability of HMOs

Holding: Vested authority in independent review for claims of health insurance denial

Doe v. Mutual of Omaha Insurance Co. (1999)

Issue: HIV/AIDS coverage caps.

Conclusion: Overturned discriminatory coverage limits.

Rowland v. Christian (1968)

Issue: Care access.

Conclusion: Extended duty of care to include risks that may foreseeably occur.

Public Health

Jacobson v. Massachusetts (1905)

Issue: Vaccine mandates.

Conclusion: Held compulsory vaccination statutes constitutional.

Cruickshank v. Holladay (1987)

Issue: Quarantine power.

Conclusion: Vindicated the state’s authority to compel quarantines in epidemic times.

Gonzales v. Oregon (2006)

Issue: Assisted suicide.

Conclusion: Allowed states to enact laws permitting physician-assisted suicide.

South Dakota v. Dole (1987)

Issue: Federal public health funding.

Outcome: Allowed conditional federal funding of state programs.

Wyeth v. Levine (2009)

Issue: Prescription drug labeling.

Outcome: Held drug manufacturers liable for inadequate labeling.

Biotechnology and Research

Association for Molecular Pathology v. Myriad Genetics, Inc. (2013)

Issue: Patenting genes.

Outcome: Banned patenting of naturally occurring genes.

Moore v. Regents of the University of California (1990)

Issue: Ownership of genetic material.

Outcome: Patients do not own their discarded cells used in research.

Sherley v. Sebelius (2012)

Issue: Stem cell research.

Result: Permitted federal funding for a particular type of stem cell research.

Diamond v. Chakrabarty (1980)

Issue: Patenting biotechnology.

Result: Permitted the patenting of genetically altered organism.

Grimes v. Kennedy Krieger Institute (2001)

Issue: Research ethics.

Result: Demonstrated necessity of informed consent in nontherapeutic research

Telemedicine and Emerging Issues

Doe v. Walmart (2020)

Issue: Health care data breach.

Result: Telemedicine demonstrated the need for cybersecurity.

Gamble v. United States (1971)

Issue: Healthcare for prisoners.

Outcome: Established that the denial of medical care violates the Eighth Amendment.

People v. Jovanovic (1999)

Issue: Digital privacy in healthcare.

Outcome: Established admissibility of digital evidence.

Riggins v. Nevada (1992)

Issue: Involuntary medication.

Outcome: Limited the administration of antipsychotic drugs.

Doe v. Bolton (1973)

Issue: Healthcare access.

Outcome: Defined health as the overall well-being, including physical, emotional, and psychological health.

Conclusion

These landmark cases have shaped the modern healthcare system, balancing patient rights, provider responsibilities, and public health priorities. They continue to influence healthcare practices, policymaking, and ethical standards worldwide.