{"status":"ok","message-type":"work","message-version":"1.0.0","message":{"indexed":{"date-parts":[[2026,9,29]],"date-time":"2026-09-29T02:00:51Z","timestamp":1790647251819,"version":"4.1.0"},"reference-count":13,"publisher":"Cambridge University Press (CUP)","license":[{"start":{"date-parts":[[2026,9,29]],"date-time":"2026-09-29T00:00:00Z","timestamp":1790640000000},"content-version":"unspecified","delay-in-days":0,"URL":"http:\/\/creativecommons.org\/licenses\/by\/4.0"}],"content-domain":{"domain":[],"crossmark-restriction":false},"short-container-title":["J. Law. Med. Ethics"],"abstract":"<jats:title>Abstract<\/jats:title>\n                  <jats:p>The litigation brought by the Estate of Henrietta Lacks against Thermo Fisher Scientific, Ultragenyx Pharmaceutical, and Novartis Pharmaceuticals reframes benefit-sharing from voluntary institutional ethics into an enforceable legal duty. By pleading a single equitable claim \u2014 unjust enrichment \u2014 the Estate seeks to bypass the property and informed-consent doctrines that have defeated comparable tissue-appropriation suits, while accepting distinctive risks involving remoteness, limitations, causation, and apportionment. This commentary examines the strategy\u2019s strengths and vulnerabilities through the still-pending Ultragenyx case, and considers its implications for research consent, prospective benefit-sharing frameworks, and bioethics pedagogy. Whether or not the remaining claim succeeds, the litigation has already altered the conversation about who should profit from human biological materials.<\/jats:p>","DOI":"10.1017\/jme.2026.10291","type":"journal-article","created":{"date-parts":[[2026,9,29]],"date-time":"2026-09-29T01:21:13Z","timestamp":1790644873000},"page":"1-3","source":"Crossref","is-referenced-by-count":0,"title":["The Henrietta Lacks Case: Ongoing Litigation Seeks Closure"],"prefix":"10.1017","author":[{"ORCID":"https:\/\/orcid.org\/0009-0000-5252-2175","authenticated-orcid":false,"given":"Allegra","family":"Rollo","sequence":"first","affiliation":[{"id":[{"id":"https:\/\/ror.org\/05gq02987","id-type":"ROR","asserted-by":"publisher"}],"name":"Brown University Warren Alpert Medical School"}],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Shelly","family":"Simana","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"id":[{"id":"https:\/\/ror.org\/02n2fzt79","id-type":"ROR","asserted-by":"publisher"}],"name":"Boston College Law School"}],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"ORCID":"https:\/\/orcid.org\/0000-0001-7730-1192","authenticated-orcid":false,"given":"Eli Y.","family":"Adashi","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"id":[{"id":"https:\/\/ror.org\/05gq02987","id-type":"ROR","asserted-by":"publisher"}],"name":"Brown University Warren Alpert Medical School"}],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]}],"member":"56","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2026,9,29]]},"reference":[{"key":"S1073110526102915_r3","unstructured":"3. Lacks v. Thermo Fisher Scientific, No. 1:21-cv-02524 (D. Md.) (settled and dismissed Aug. 1, 2023)."},{"key":"S1073110526102915_r5","unstructured":"5. Lacks v. Ultragenyx Pharmaceutical, No. 1:23-cv-02171 (D. Md.) (motion to dismiss denied May 20, 2024) (Boardman, J.)."},{"key":"S1073110526102915_r4","unstructured":"4. Lacks v. Novartis Pharmaceuticals, No. 1:24-cv-02267 (D. Md.) (confidential settlement announced Feb. 2026)."},{"key":"S1073110526102915_r6","unstructured":"6. Moore v. Regents of the Univ. of Cal., 51 Cal. 3d 120 (1990)."},{"key":"S1073110526102915_r2","unstructured":"2. Skloot, Rebecca , The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks (Crown, 2010)."},{"key":"S1073110526102915_r1","unstructured":"1. Lacks v. Thermo Fisher Scientific, Inc., No. 1:21-cv-02524 (D. Md.) (settled and dismissed Aug. 1, 2023); Lacks v. Ultragenyx Pharmaceutical, Inc., No. 1:23-cv-02171 (D. Md. filed Aug. 10, 2023) (motion to dismiss denied May 20, 2024) (Boardman, J.); Lacks v. Novartis Pharmaceuticals, No. 1:24-cv-02267 (D. Md. filed Aug. 5, 2024) (confidential settlement announced Feb. 2026)."},{"key":"S1073110526102915_r13","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1056\/NEJMp1005203"},{"key":"S1073110526102915_r11","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/j.neunet.2019.03.011"},{"key":"S1073110526102915_r7","unstructured":"7. Greenberg v. Miami Children\u2019s Hospital Research Institute, Inc., 264 F. Supp. 2d 1064 (S.D. Fla. 2003); Washington Univ. v. Catalona, 490 F.3d 667 (8th Cir. 2007)."},{"key":"S1073110526102915_r9","unstructured":"9. Lacks v. Ultragenyx Pharmaceutical, No. 1:23-cv-02171 (D. Md.) (motion for judgment on the pleadings denied Mar. 3, 2025) (Boardman, J.) (rejecting dormant Commerce Clause challenge to Md. Code Ann., Cts. & Jud. Proc. \u00a7 5-204)."},{"key":"S1073110526102915_r10","unstructured":"10. Lacks v. Ultragenyx Pharmaceutical, No. 1:23-cv-02171 (D. Md.) (May 20, 2024 order denying motion to dismiss)."},{"key":"S1073110526102915_r8","unstructured":"8. Lacks v. Ultragenyx Pharmaceutical, No. 1:23-cv-02171 (D. Md. filed Aug. 10, 2023)."},{"key":"S1073110526102915_r12","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1038\/nrg1991"}],"container-title":["Journal of Law, Medicine &amp; Ethics"],"original-title":[],"language":"en","link":[{"URL":"https:\/\/www.cambridge.org\/core\/services\/aop-cambridge-core\/content\/view\/S1073110526102915","content-type":"unspecified","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"similarity-checking"}],"deposited":{"date-parts":[[2026,9,29]],"date-time":"2026-09-29T01:21:22Z","timestamp":1790644882000},"score":1,"resource":{"primary":{"URL":"https:\/\/www.cambridge.org\/core\/product\/identifier\/S1073110526102915\/type\/journal_article"}},"subtitle":[],"short-title":[],"issued":{"date-parts":[[2026,9,29]]},"references-count":13,"alternative-id":["S1073110526102915"],"URL":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1017\/jme.2026.10291","relation":{},"ISSN":["1073-1105","1748-720X"],"issn-type":[{"value":"1073-1105","type":"print"},{"value":"1748-720X","type":"electronic"}],"subject":[],"published":{"date-parts":[[2026,9,29]]}}}