Opinion ID: 2372686
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 5

Heading: patients' rights

Text: Appellant makes a separate argument that his termination interferes with the rights of his patients to be treated by a physician of their choice. In support of this argument, he quotes from the dissenting opinion of Justice Roberts in Adler v. Montefiore Hospital Ass'n of Western Pennsylvania, 453 Pa. 60, 311 A.2d 634 (1973). This Court has the greatest respect for the current Chief Justice, but that cannot transmute his dissent into the law of this Commonwealth. Appellant does not cite any case law recognizing such patients' right which is binding on this Court. Nor need we decide in our disposition of this case whether such a right exists. We hold only that, even if such a right exists, the interests of the state would override it here. Having found no unconstitutional action, the order of the court below is accordingly affirmed. WICKERSHAM and WIEAND, JJ., concur in the result.