Recently in Family Law Category

Two months after a three-justice panel of the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals struck down a provision of South Dakota's informed consent law, the Court of Appeal announced they will hold an en banc hearing on the matter.

The controversial law in question expanded South Dakota's requirements for informed consent to abortion in 2005. The Court of Appeals upheld the majority of the law's provisions - such as informing the patient that the abortion will terminate the life of a whole, separate, unique, living human being - in September.

The Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals last week upheld a South Dakota informed consent law that requires an abortion provider to inform a pregnant patient about her “existing relationship” with an “unborn human being.”

The case stems from a Planned Parenthood challenge to a 2005 South Dakota Public Health and Safety Code amendment expanding the requirements for informed consent to abortion. Under the law, a doctor must give a woman contemplating abortion oral advisories 24 hours before the procedure and written advisories at least 2 hours before the procedure.

Children are expensive. Childcare and tuition costs are increasing far faster than the rate of inflation. As a result, many couples are waiting longer to have a child, which, in turn, means that more couples are turning to fertility treatments, including artificial insemination, to conceive when they can afford a child.

Why should this matter to lawyers?

Sometimes family planning does not occur on the couples’ intended schedules. Sometimes one partner dies before the couple can start a family. But when the surviving partner decides to have children using the eggs or sperm of his/her late spouse, the legal result can turn into a nightmare hypothetical from your law school past.

District court's dismissal on summary judgment of plaintiff's claims of employment retaliation and violations of the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) is affirmed where: 1) plaintiff failed to show he provided adequate notice to his employer that he had a serious health condition rendering him unable to work; 2) plaintiff's claim that defendant interfered with his FMLA rights by demoting him for unexcused absences must fail; 3) plaintiff's retaliation claim fails for the same reasons as his interference claim.          

Read Scobey v. Nucor Steel-Arkansas, No. 08-1192

Appellate Information

Submitted: December 11, 2008

Filed: August 25, 2009

Judges

Opinion by Shepherd, Circuit Judge

District court's grant of summary judgment for plaintiff is reversed where the court erred in holding the mortgage was invalid under state law because both spouses did not sign it, as: 1) plaintiffs are estopped from claiming invalid mortgage since the nonsigning spouse knew of and intended to mortgage the homestead; 2) she retained benefits; and 3) the bank significantly changed its position in reliance on validity of mortgage. 

Read Karnitz v. Well Fargo Bank, N.A., No. 08-2100

Appellate Information
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Minnesota.
Submitted: February 12, 2009
Filed: July 17, 2009

Judges
Before WOLLMAN, HANSEN, and BYE, Circuit Judges.
Opinion by HANSEN, Circuit Judge.
Dissenting Opinion by Bye, Circuit Judge.