Garofalo v. Princess Cruises Garofalo v. Princess Cruises

Garofalo v. Princess Cruises

85 CAL.APP.4TH 1060, 102 CAL.RPTR.2D 754, 2000.CA.0042977 , 1 CAL. DAILY OP. SERV. 82, 2001 DAILY JOURNAL D.A.R. 93

    • USD 0.99
    • USD 0.99

Descripción editorial

In this case we consider whether a conservator of the person may withhold artificial nutrition and hydration from a conscious conservatee who is not terminally ill, comatose, or in a persistent vegetative state, and who has not left formal instructions for health care or appointed an agent or surrogate for health care decisions. Interpreting Probate Code section 2355 in light of the relevant provisions of the California Constitution, we conclude a conservator may not withhold artificial nutrition and hydration from such a person absent clear and convincing evidence the conservators decision is in accordance with either the conservatees own wishes or best interest.

GÉNERO
Técnicos y profesionales
PUBLICADO
2000
29 de diciembre
IDIOMA
EN
Inglés
EXTENSIÓN
36
Páginas
EDITORIAL
LawApp Publishers
VENTAS
Innodata Book Distribution Services Inc
TAMAÑO
78.5
KB

Más libros de California Court of Appeals

Zilog, Inc. v. Superior Court of Santa Clara County Zilog, Inc. v. Superior Court of Santa Clara County
2001
Phillips v. St. Mary Regional Medical Center Phillips v. St. Mary Regional Medical Center
2002
People v. Legault People v. Legault
2002
Guardian North Bay, Inc. v. Superior Court of Santa Clara County Guardian North Bay, Inc. v. Superior Court of Santa Clara County
2001
Ingham v. Luxor Cab Company Ingham v. Luxor Cab Company
2001
Anchor Marine Repair Co. v. Magnan Anchor Marine Repair Co. v. Magnan
2001