Robert B. v. Susan B.

At the center of this parentage action is two-year-old Daniel B., who was bom to appellant Susan B., a single woman, after a fertility clinic implanted embryos belonging to Robert and Denise B. into Susan. The trial court ruled that Susan is Daniel’s mother and Robert is his father. Denise was dismissed for lack of standing.

Both Susan and Denise appeal. Susan contends that the court erred by failing to apply Family Code section 7613, subdivision (b) to preclude Robert’s paternity claim. Denise contends that the court improperly dismissed her because she had standing as an “interested person” under section 7650. We find no error and affirm the judgment.

Background

In May 2000 Robert and Denise B. contracted with an anonymous ovum donor to obtain the donor’s eggs for fertilization with Robert’s sperm. The contract reflected the intent of the contracting parties that Robert and Denise would be the parents of any children produced from the resulting embryos.

Meanwhile, Susan went to the same fertility clinic with the intent of purchasing genetic material from “two strangers who would contractually sign away their rights” so that “there would be no paternity…