ORLANDO, Fla. -- Alice Pinette is sure her husband of 53 years, in a hospital hooked up to life-support machines, isn't on death's door. He's aware of his surroundings and can communicate, she says.

That's why the Clermont woman is going to court rather than watch Hanford Pinette be disconnected from those machines, despite a living will stating dying would be preferable if he were ever faced with a terminal illness and incapacity. Alice Pinette possesses a document, signed the same day in 1998 as the living will, giving her power of attorney over her 73-year-old husband's life.

At a court hearing Tuesday, arguments will be presented over which legal paper trumps the other. Then Circuit Court Judge Lawrence Kirkwood must decide not just whether Pinette should perish, but determine a landmark right-to-die case.

"This is a brand new area of the law," said William E. Ruffier, Alice Pinette's attorney.

Hanford Pinette wrote a living will in 1998 and assigned his wife to carry out his wishes, designating her as his "surrogate."

In the event of a terminal condition with no probability of recovery, Pinette stated he wanted "to die naturally" and receive medication only to "alleviate pain."

But the power of attorney states her husband assigned her to decide how he should be cared for, including life-prolonging measures

Earlier this year, Pinette suffered congestive heart failure, his wife said. He has been hospitalized since February, according to the petition filed by Orlando Regional Healthcare, and is currently at Lucerne Hospital.

In court documents, the hospital argues that Pinette's "renal system, respiratory system and cardiovascular system are all being supported by artificial means alone."

David L. Evans, Orlando Regional Healthcare's lawyer, said the hospital maintains Pinette will not get better and the hospital wants only to abide by his wishes.

"All we can do is come in and describe his medical condition and his competency," Evans told the Orlando Sentinel last week. "We're just doing what we feel we're legally obligated to do."

But Alice Pinette, who goes to the hospital daily, insists her husband is far better off than the hospital believes, her attorney said.

"People typically think of these living wills, when they sign them, as 'If I'm in a vegetative state, hooked up to a bunch of machines and draining my family's bank account, my wish is to not have that artificial life support,"' Ruffier said. "But in Mr. Pinette's case, he is alert, aware and able to still enjoy his family."

The case is being watched closely in many legal circles.

"The living will is supposed to ... supersede even the wife or a designated surrogate," said Lauchlin Waldoch, a Tallahassee lawyer who is on the National Academy of Elder Law Attorneys' board of directors. "This is a very good example why we, as elder law attorneys, preach the gospel of coming to see us."

Another expert saw the Pinettes' case as a cautionary example of why living wills only go so far.

"The health care surrogate is more powerful in many ways," said Scott Solkoff, chairman of the elder-law section of the Florida Bar. "In real life, regardless of what the statutes state, the surrogate is a real person, not just a piece of paper."

Hanford Pinette's situation mirrors that of Terri Schiavo, the severely brain-damaged Clearwater woman who has become a cause celebre for pro-life activists and advocacy groups for the disabled.

In a case that brought attention to living wills, Schiavo collapsed 14 years ago and fell into what doctors say is a deep vegetative state. While her husband wants Schiavo's feeding tube removed, her parents say she is well enough to be kept alive.

Schiavo's fate is still working its way through the legal system; the Pinettes are about to start on the same path.

"It's the same situation," Ruffier said. "But it's the flip side."