Legal Opinion

Stam v. State

Court of Appeals of North Carolina

Decided June 17, 1980No. 7910SC546PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

PARKER, Judge.

Initially, plaintiff contends that the use of state tax monies for the funding of elective abortions through the State Abortion Fund is unconstitutional because a human fetus is a “person” within the meaning of Article I, Sections 1 & 19 of the North Carolina Constitution and is therefore entitled to the constitutional protections of those sections. We note at the outset that there is no federal constitutional requirement that a state provide funding for elective abortions. Maher v. Roe, 432 U.S. 464, 97 S. Ct. 2376, 53 L. Ed. 2d 484 (1977). Thus, the narrow question which…

2Cases cited17 opinions

  1. Roe v. WadeSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
  2. Maher v. RoeSupreme Court of the United States · 1977
  3. Bulova Watch Co. v. Brand Distributors of North Wilkesboro, Inc.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1974
  4. Perry v. StancilSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1953
  5. Allred v. GravesSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1964

12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Whittington v. North Carolina Department of Human ResourcesCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1990
  2. Rosie J. Ex Rel. Raleigh Women's Health Organization v. North Carolina Department of Human ResourcesSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1997
  3. In Re an Easement of Right of Way in Fairfield Park SubdivisionCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1988
  4. Blankenship v. BartlettCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2007
  5. DiDonato v. WortmanCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1986

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API