Hypo #1 - due 2/17/01


Case Type:

Hypothetical.

Exigence:

Clients decided to conceive a child by purchasing sperm from defendant sperm bank. The contract between the sperm bank and the purchasers stated that it was "the intention of all parties that the identity of said [sperm] donor shall be and forever remain anonymous." After a child was conceived and diagnosed as having a genetic kidney disease that came from the sperm donor, the clients sued the sperm bank and sought to discover the donor's identity for purposes of conducting his deposition. The clients located a party believed to be the sperm donor but he opposed efforts to confirm his identity on grounds that he was a third party beneficiary of the confidentiality agreement between the clients and the sperm bank. May the 3rd party use the "confidentiality agreement" to prevent disclosure of the real donor's identity? If not, why not? What rules/cases/codes, or policies would the court employ in decidiing this case?


Audience:


You, the United States Supreme Court.

Possible
Constraints:

Family Law
Children

Decision:

Up to you, and your group. Please post the rationale/reasoning of each group member.

Related
issues:


Right to Contract
Freedom of Contract
Confidentiality Agreements

Group Analysis:


post your groups work here by 2/17/2001

Credits

form adapted from Prof Jean Goodwin- Northwestern University The Free Speech website,http://faculty-web.at.nwu.edu/commstud/freespeech/

Return to course
home page