The Topeka sperm donor who has been fighting the state to not be declared a father hit the digital and paper newsstands once again. For those who need a little catching up, William Marotta donated his sperm to a lesbian couple wanting a baby.
The couple placed an ad in Craigslist and Marotta responded.
The state of Kansas is trying to make Marotta pay child support.
In Oct. 2012, the Kansas Department for Children and Families filed a case against Marotta stating he was the father of a little girl, born in 2009. The declared mother was Jennifer Schreiner, who carried the baby
Over time, Schriener and her partner, Angela Bauer split up and are no longer in a relationship.
Immediately, Marotta sought legal representation opposing the state. He never intended to be the father and only wanted to help Schreiner and Bauer in their quest for a baby.
Marotta also states he signed a contract waiving any parental responsibilities or rights to the child.
Still, the state thinks otherwise.
Recently, Marotta’s attorney went to the Shawnee County District Court filing a new motion.
Apparently, the state wants to call an expert witness in the upcoming case. Marotta’s attorney is tossing out legal hurdles to prevent this expert from getting a seat on the witness stand.
The Topeka attorney, Benoit Swinnen, who filed this motion was direct in his legal claim.
On Nov. 18 and 20, a Ross hearing for the case is on the docket. For those new to a Ross Hearing, this is when the court decides if it is in the, “best interest of the child to set aside a presumption of paternity in favor of a third party.”
This sperm donor case has fascinated the media and the public and I hope that Marotta is not declared the father as he is clearly a sperm donor; however, the law is not on his side. Marotta’s attorney is doing all he can to prevent a great injustice.
And I know I’m not the only one in his cheering section.
In Biles’ article, “Attorney Files Motion Block Expert Sperm Donor Case,” she was able to get some hard-hitting quotes from Swinnen.
“Through circumstances I don’t quite understand, the court has jumped in and in an order said the state designated an expert, and I don’t know when or how that came about because I didn’t sign off on it,” Swinnen said.
She went on to write, “Swinnen said the district court lacks authority to designate an expert on behalf of the state, and an expert designation is due 90 days before trial unless otherwise approved by the court. He contends no motion was filed seeking relief from the rules and he never received notification of the expert designation.”
Biles also points out that Swinnen said the hearing date has been set for several months and should be upheld.
In his recently filed motion, Swinnen says the upcoming case should move forward without the need for experts.
Swinnen told the reporter, “All I want is, let’s get the facts and what’s in the best interest of the child. It’s unfair to keep dragging this on and on when we have a trial date.”
Biles did make attempts to get statements from the attorney representing the Department for Children and Families but has been unsuccessful.
No calls have been returned and that’s not a real surprise.
Now, we have to wait and see what legal moves are made next.