## Facts

- Belinda and William Jeter underwent in vitro fertilization at Mayo Clinic Arizona.
- Five fertilized eggs developed for approximately three days and were cryopreserved for storage.
- During a transfer of the cryopreserved pre-embryos to another fertility facility, the five pre-embryos were allegedly lost or destroyed.
- The Jeters sued Mayo for wrongful death, negligent loss of irreplaceable property (negligence), breach of fiduciary duty, and breach of a bailment contract.
- The trial court dismissed: (1) wrongful death, ruling the pre-embryos were not “persons” under Arizona’s wrongful-death statutes; (2) negligence, ruling Arizona did not recognize negligent loss of irreplaceable property; and (3) fiduciary-duty and bailment claims, ruling they were barred by Arizona’s Medical Malpractice Act.
- The Jeters appealed from the Rule 12(b)(6) dismissal.

## Issues

1. Whether a cryopreserved, three-day-old fertilized human egg (pre-embryo) is a “person” under Arizona’s wrongful-death statute.
2. Whether Arizona law forecloses a negligence claim labeled as “negligent loss of irreplaceable property” arising from the loss of cryopreserved pre-embryos.
3. Whether breach of fiduciary duty and bailment/contract claims based on storage and transfer of cryopreserved pre-embryos are barred by Arizona’s Medical Malpractice Act.

## Decision

- Affirmed dismissal of the wrongful-death claim because a cryopreserved, three-day-old pre-embryo is not a “person” under Arizona’s wrongful-death statute absent legislative expansion.
- Reversed dismissal of the negligence claim, holding the complaint stated a conventional negligence claim and Arizona law did not categorically bar recovery for negligent loss of irreplaceable property.
- Reversed dismissal of the breach of fiduciary duty and bailment/contract claims, holding they were not barred at the pleading stage by the Medical Malpractice Act.
- Remanded for further proceedings on the negligence, fiduciary-duty, and bailment/contract claims.

## Legal Principles

- Arizona’s wrongful-death statutes apply only to the death of a “person”; absent legislative action, that term does not include a cryopreserved, three-day-old pre-embryo.
- Extension of wrongful-death “person” status beyond recognized categories (such as a viable fetus under Arizona precedent) is a legislative decision where the statutory text does not clearly reach cryopreserved pre-embryos.
- Claims styled as “negligent loss of irreplaceable property” are analyzed under ordinary negligence elements; “irreplaceability” pertains primarily to damages, not the existence of a duty or cause of action.
- Not every claim against a health-care provider is necessarily subsumed by the Medical Malpractice Act; fiduciary-duty and bailment/contract theories tied to storage and transfer obligations may proceed if adequately pleaded.

## Conclusion

The court held that cryopreserved, three-day-old pre-embryos are not “persons” for Arizona wrongful-death liability, but allowed the parents’ negligence, fiduciary-duty, and bailment/contract claims based on the alleged loss or destruction of the pre-embryos to go forward on remand.


Jeter v. Mayo Clinic Ariz., 211 Ariz. 386, 121 P.3d 1256 (Ct. App. 2005)