Judge hears arguments in Craigslist case
Says she'll issue written ruling on motions seeking to decide the case
Posted: October 25, 2013
By Tim Hrenchir
THE CAPITAL-JOURNAL
Attorneys representing the state of Kansas and William Marotta presented arguments to a Shawnee County District Court judge Friday in the Craigslist case, which focuses on whether Marotta is legally considered a sperm donor or the father of a 4-year-old girl.
At the end of a nearly hourlong hearing, Judge Mary Mattivi said she would issue a written ruling addressing motions both sides have filed seeking summary judgment in their favor. A summary judgment is a determination made by a court without a full trial.
Mattivi heard Friday from Timothy Keck, co-lead counsel for the state; Benoit Swinnen, representing Marotta; M. Jill Dykes, guardian ad litem for the child involved; and briefly from Jennifer Berger, attorney representing the child’s mother, Jennifer Schreiner.
The Kansas Department for Children and Families filed the case in October 2012 seeking to have Marotta, a Topekan, declared the father of a girl Schreiner bore in 2009.
Marotta is fighting the action. He says he didn’t intend to be the child’s father and signed a contract waiving his parental rights and responsibilities while agreeing to donate sperm in a plastic cup to Schreiner and Angela Bauer, who was then her lesbian partner.
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.
The statute, KSA 23-2208(f), says, “The donor of semen provided to a licensed physician for use in artificial insemination of a woman other than the donor’s wife is treated in law as if he were not the birth father of a child thereby conceived, unless agreed to in writing by the donor and the woman.”
Motions for summary judgment were filed in May by Keck and in July by Swinnen.
Keck characterized the case Friday as being about child support. Swinnen cited several court rulings he said support the argument that Marotta is legally a sperm donor and not required to pay child support.
Swinnen also said the case is “outside” statute KSA 23-2208(f) because the statute doesn’t specifically give a directive that the artificial insemination must be carried out by a physician.
Dykes said if the court rules in the state’s favor, it must order genetic testing and consider the best interests of the child involved. She asked Mattivi to order a “best interests of the child” hearing in the case.