Although medical ethics' vast literature devotes sparse attention to the Claire Conroy case, it remains a legal landmark. Through the case, the New Jersey Supreme Court in 1985 set a legal precedent in ruling that the artificial provision of nutrition and hydration via nasogastric feeding was considered medical treatment in the technical sense and thereby subject to treatment that an individual patient had the legal right to refuse. Imposing such treatment upon the patient without the patient's consent could constitute a violation of that patient's privacy.