# Azzolino v. Dingfelder

> Supreme Court of North Carolina · December 10, 1985 · 315 N.C. 103

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9586399

## Case

- **Full name:** JANE A. AZZOLINO; LOUIS AZZOLINO; MICHAEL LAWRENCE AZZOLINO, by His General Guardians, JANE A. AZZOLINO and LOUIS AZZOLINO; REGINA MARY GALLAGHER, by Her General Guardian, JANE A. AZZOLINO; And DAVID JOHN AZZOLINO, by His General Guardian, LOUIS AZZOLINO v. JAMES R. DINGFELDER; JEAN DOWDY; AND ORANGE COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE HEALTH SERVICES, INC., Doing Business as HAYWOOD-MONCURE COMMUNITY HEALTH CENTER
- **Court:** Supreme Court of North Carolina
- **Decided:** December 10, 1985
- **Citations:** 315 N.C. 103; 337 S.E.2d 528; 1985 N.C. LEXIS 2169
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurring in part by Frye
- **Judges:** Mitchell, Exum, Frye, Martin
- **Cited by:** 69 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9586399

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- declining to recognize wrongful birth claims and deferring to Legislature to recognize such actions

## Opinion text

Justice Frye
concurring in part and dissenting in part.
I concur in the holding of part III of the majority opinion with respect to the siblings’ claim. I concur in the result reached by the majority in denying the wrongful life claim on behalf of the child.
I dissent from that portion of the opinion which denies the validity of a medical malpractice claim in this State on behalf of the parents for the wrongful birth of an unhealthy child. The decision of the majority is contrary to that reached by the great majority of courts which have considered such a claim. See generally W. Keeton, D. Dobbs, R. Keeton & D. Owen, Prosser and Keeton on the Law of Torts, p. 372 (5th ed. 1984). The fact that courts differ as to the measure of damages in such cases is insufficient reason to deny the validity of the underlying claim. This Court should recognize the validity of the claim and determine an appropriate measure of damages, while realizing that the General Assembly of North Carolina could, by appropriate legislation, adopt a new or different standard.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9586399. Public record. Not legal advice.