This section contains the nature of the case and procedural background.

In 1985, P's mother was involved in a car accident with a vehicle driven by Unjian's (D) employee. She sued D for injuries she sustained as a result of that accident and settled that action. As a result of that accident, the mother was fitted with a lumbo-peritoneal shunt. In 1987, O'Hare became pregnant with P. During that pregnancy, the fetus compressed the lumbo-peritoneal shunt that had been installed and, in order to avoid further injury to the mother, P was delivered 51 days premature. P was born prematurely and allegedly suffers from injuries relating to premature birth. P now claims that the negligent conduct of D from the accident caused her injuries and seeks damages therefor. P alleged that the personal injuries she sustained were a proximate result of the negligence of D. D demurred to P's complaint. D contends that no legal duty was owed to P under the facts presented since claims for preconception negligence involve a special 'physician-patient' relationship which gives rise to a duty to the subsequently conceived 'foreseeable' fetus. D also claimed that P's injuries were not reasonably foreseeable. The trial court sustained the demurrer without leave to amend on the ground that recognition of such a cause of action would 'be an unwarranted extension of a duty of care.' P appealed.

The legal issues presented in this case will be displayed here.

The court's holding and decision will be displayed here.

Legal analysis from Dean's Law Dictionary will be displayed here.