Jason People v. Danielle S.

Good Law
171 Cal. Rptr. 3d 789·2014 Cal. App. LEXIS 418·226 Cal. App. 4th 167·2014 WL 1912547·14 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 5332
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMay 14, 2014B248629California5,126 words

Opinion

Opinion

Willhite, J.

Family Code section 7613, subdivision (b) (hereafter, section 7613(b)) currently provides: “The donor of semen provided to a licensed physician and surgeon or to a licensed sperm bank for use in assisted reproduction of a woman other than the donor’s spouse is treated in law as if he were not the natural parent of a child thereby conceived, unless otherwise agreed to in a writing signed by the donor and the woman prior to the conception of the child.” In Steven S. v. Deborah D. (2005) 127 Cal.App.4th 319 [ 25 Cal.Rptr.3d 482 ] (Steven S.), we reversed a finding of paternity in favor of a donor of semen provided to a licensed physician, rejecting the sperm donor’s argument “that we should look beyond the words of the statute to find legislative intent for a public policy favoring a finding of paternity where, as here, the mother was in an intimate relationship with a known donor and also attempted to conceive naturally, albeit unsuccessfully.” (Id. at p. 325.) In rejecting the donor’s argument, we employed broad and categorical language. We declared: “There can be no paternity claim from a sperm donor who is not married to the woman who becomes pregnant with the donated…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.