Saturday, January 5, 2013
There was a particular case that was decided in Kansas in 2007 that might provide some insight to the case. In that case, the Supreme Court of Kansas denied a sperm donor parental rights because there was no contractual arrangement between the donor and the mother granting him those rights. Marotta's attorney, Ben Swinnen, argued that this case could provide a defense because it appears that the court's past ruling runs contrary to the assertions the Department for Children and Families. Without a contract granting rights to Marotta, his attorney has argued that Marotta did not have parental rights or the financial obligations that would stem from those rights.
See Kevin Murphy, Child Support Claim Rankles Sperm Donor To Lesbian Couple, Yahoo!News, Jan. 2, 2013.
Special thanks to Jim Hartnett, Jr. (Partner, The Hartnett Law Firm) and Jim Hillhouse (Professional Legal Marketing (PLM, Inc.)) for bringing this article to my attention.