Filtering by
- Open Access: Open Access
![173216-Thumbnail Image.png](https://d1rbsgppyrdqq4.cloudfront.net/s3fs-public/styles/width_400/public/2023-02/173216-Thumbnail%20Image.png?versionId=yzKo2o.a882vN_c_q.kWM61bU5EW9t1y&X-Amz-Content-Sha256=UNSIGNED-PAYLOAD&X-Amz-Algorithm=AWS4-HMAC-SHA256&X-Amz-Credential=AKIASBVQ3ZQ42ZLA5CUJ/20240616/us-west-2/s3/aws4_request&X-Amz-Date=20240616T051441Z&X-Amz-SignedHeaders=host&X-Amz-Expires=120&X-Amz-Signature=4bd3527f4acc41c5f66650e3373f35d79b16a70a74549ba475549525cc0adf17&itok=01jTxGEI)
In Jeter v. Mayo, the Court of Appeals of Arizona in 2005 held that a cryopreserved, three-day-old pre-embryo is not a person for purposes of Arizona's wrongful death statutes, and that the Arizona Legislature was best suited to decide whether to expand the law to include cryopreserved pre-embryos. The Court of Appeals affirmed a decision by the Maricopa County Superior Court to dismiss a couple's wrongful death claim after the Mayo Clinic (Mayo) allegedly lost or destroyed several of their cryopreserved pre-embryos. In reaching its decision, the Court of Appeals explored ethical and legal issues relating to cryopreserved pre-embryos, including prior case law, the principles of statutory construction, and the Arizona Legislature's role in balancing the societal interests involved.