Logourl black
From our private database of 14,100+ case briefs...

Szafranski v. Dunston

Appellate Court of Illinois for the First District
993 N.E.2d 502 (2013)


Facts

Jacob Szafranski (plaintiff) and Karla Dunston (defendant) were in a romantic relationship when Dunston was diagnosed with non-Hodgkins lymphoma. Dunston’s doctor informed her that chemotherapy would likely cause her to be infertile. Before Dunston began chemotherapy, Szafranski agreed to donate his sperm to create pre-embryos with Dunston’s eggs. As a standard procedure, Dunston and Szafranski signed an informed-consent form at the hospital that provided that the embryos could not be used without the consent of both parties. On that same day, Dunston and Szafranski met with an attorney and decided to enter a co-parent agreement. The co-parent agreement gave Dunston the right to control disposition of the embryos in the event of a breakup. However, neither Dunston nor Szafranski  ever signed the co-parent agreement. Nevertheless, Szafranski deposited his sperm, which was used to fertilize Dunston’s eggs. As a result, three pre-embryos survived and were frozen. One month after Dunston began chemotherapy, Szafranski ended their relationship. A few months later, Szafranski filed a pro se complaint, seeking a permanent injunction against Dunston so that he could preserve his right not to become a father. Dunston counterclaimed, seeking sole custody of the pre-embryos so that she could use those pre-embryos to bear children. Dunston also filed a motion for summary judgment. The circuit court granted Dunston’s summary-judgment motion. Szafranski appealed.

Rule of Law

The rule of law is the black letter law upon which the court rested its decision.

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Issue

The issue section includes the dispositive legal issue in the case phrased as a question.

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Holding and Reasoning (Quinn, J.)

The holding and reasoning section includes:

  • A "yes" or "no" answer to the question framed in the issue section;
  • A summary of the majority or plurality opinion, using the CREAC method; and
  • The procedural disposition (e.g. reversed and remanded, affirmed, etc.).

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 97,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Vanderbilt, Berkeley, and the University of Illinois—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students. Read our student testimonials.

  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students. Read more about Quimbee.

Here's why 221,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 14,100 briefs, keyed to 189 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.