## Facts

- A decedent died in New Mexico, and an autopsy was performed under the authority of Dr. John Smialek, the State Medical Investigator.
- The decedent’s mother, Hanagoni Bitsie, as next of kin, filed a civil damages action alleging the autopsy violated Navajo religious beliefs prohibiting autopsies and infringed free exercise rights.
- The decedent’s siblings (Ruth Y. Begay, Minnie Conn, Harry K. Harrison, Rex Harrison, and David Yazzie) sought to join as additional plaintiffs.
- The siblings asserted their own claims for damages under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, alleging the autopsy violated their free exercise rights.
- The trial court dismissed the siblings’ claims for lack of standing.
- The court of appeals reversed, allowing the siblings to proceed.
- The supreme court granted certiorari limited to whether the siblings had standing to join their mother’s damages action.

## Issues

1. Whether the decedent’s siblings have standing under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 to seek damages for an allegedly wrongful autopsy that offended their religious beliefs when the decedent’s mother, as next of kin, is already suing based on the same autopsy.

## Decision

- The New Mexico Supreme Court reversed the court of appeals and affirmed the trial court’s dismissal of the siblings’ claims.
- The court held the siblings lacked standing under § 1983 in this context because they were not the relevant “party injured” when the next of kin was already asserting the claim tied to rights in the decedent’s body.
- The court rejected an approach that would confer standing on any family member whose religious beliefs were offended by an autopsy, citing the risk of obstructing autopsies authorized or required by state law.

## Legal Principles

- Standing is a threshold jurisdictional inquiry focused on whether the plaintiff has a personal stake and a legally cognizable interest in the outcome, not on the importance of the constitutional question presented.
- Under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, liability runs to the “party injured,” which the court treated as limiting recovery to the person with the primary legally recognized interest implicated by the challenged conduct.
- New Mexico law recognizes survivors’ protected interests relating to a decedent’s body (including an interest in the body’s condition), but those interests operate through a next-of-kin priority concept for asserting claims tied to interference with remains.
- When the next of kin is already pursuing damages for an allegedly wrongful autopsy, other relatives’ asserted interests are treated as insufficient to create separate § 1983 standing for the same autopsy-related injury.

## Conclusion

The court held that only the next of kin with the primary legally recognized interest in the decedent’s remains could pursue the § 1983 damages claim arising from the autopsy, and it dismissed the siblings for lack of standing to join that action.


Smialek v. Begay, 104 N.M. 375, 721 P.2d 1306 (N.M. 1986)