|
4886 Evidence that defendant engaged in a general pattern of misconduct in handling bodies donated to its Donated Body Program was not sufficient to establish misconduct in handling the body of plaintiff's deceased husband; an agreement by which plaintiff's husband donated his body to defendant's Donated Body Program did not create any duty to plaintiff; since plaintiff was not a party to the contract, she could not have relied on representations made to induce her husband to donate his body to the Program, so she cannot make out a case of fraud.CitationCONROY v REGENTS OF UC (Donated Body) 45 C4 1244 [See: Conroy v Regents (RevGrtd) 151 CA4 132, T/AT 6/07; Christensen v Superior Court 54 C3 868; City v Merrill Lynch 68 CA4 445, T/AT 1/99; Mirkin v Wasserman 5 C4 1082, T/AT 11/93]
|
|
