top of page

Oral arguments scheduled in sperm donor case

District Judge Mattivi sets hearing for 9 a.m. Oct. 25

Posted: September 3, 2013

 

By The Capital-Journal

 

Shawnee County District Judge Mary Mattivi last week scheduled oral arguments to be heard in the Craigslist case at 9 a.m. Oct. 25 in the court’s Division 10.

 

Mattivi set the hearing date Aug. 27, according to records available on the court website.

 

The Kansas Department for Children and Families filed the lawsuit in October seeking to have Topeka William Marotta declared the father of a girl Jennifer Schreiner bore in 2009 so he can be forced to pay child support.

 

Marotta contacted the women after they placed an ad seeking a sperm donor on Craigslist. The state contends their contract was moot because those involved didn’t follow a Kansas statute enacted in 1994, which the state says requires a licensed physician to perform the artificial insemination in cases involving sperm donors.

 

Motions seeking summary judgment in their favor were filed in May by Timothy Keck, co-lead counsel for the state, and in July by attorney Benoit Swinnen, representing Marotta.

 

A summary judgment is a determination made by a court without a full trial.

The crowd weighs in.
A few reader comments

"Gay and Lesbian couples have children and the children benefit from two parents that love each other and the child. It matters not what they have between their legs. Scientific facts back that up not your belief system."

 

"As a person that has sold sperm, I am very concerned about this case. If the child support is granted, I could end up having the state or individuals coming after me and I did not even get to have sex with any of the women."

 

"No good deed goes unpunished in Kansas...He did a good deed and now is facing heavy legal fees, even if he wins ....and 18 years of child support if he loses.  The state of Kansas should be ashamed, for coercing the mother, AND for filing a frivolous suit against the donor in an effort to escape supporting the child."

 

 

 

 

 

"If any couple has a child from a sperm donor, the sperm donor should be out of the picture. The couple is responsible for that child!"

 

"Once again the State rears it's ugly head and dictates to We the People."

 

"Why is this any different than if it was a man-woman relationship and one parent worked, the other stayed home.. .and then they split and the primary breadwinner in the relationship can no longer work? It is THEIR child, not his."

 

 

 

 

Feedback

 

If you have corrections or anything else, send it to:

 

jjsite2015@hotmail.com

​​​

© Proudly created with Wix.com

bottom of page