Jean Ho-Rath v. Corning Incorporated Yendee Ho-Rath v. Rhode Island Hospital

Summary

The Supreme Court affirmed the Superior Court judgments, holding that under Rhode Island law no duty of care is owed to a child born with physical defects whose parents were unaware of the risk, so the plaintiffs’ negligence and derivative loss‑of‑consortium claims fail as a matter of law. The Court also affirmed that characterizing the suit as a wrongful‑life action does not create a distinct cause of action and that summary judgment was proper.