Legal Opinion
PLANNED PARENTHOOD MINNESOTA, ND, SD v. Rounds
District Court, D. South Dakota
Decided August 20, 2009No. Civ. 05-4077-KESPublishedCited by 11 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT, INTERVENORS’ MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
KAREN E. SCHREIER, Chief Judge.
In 2005, the South Dakota Legislature passed House Bill 1166, which revised South Dakota law on informed consent to abortion by expanding the disclosure requirements. 1 Plaintiffs, Planned Parenthood Minnesota, North Dakota, South Dakota and Carol E. Ball, M.D., commenced an action, arguing that the informed consent disclosures required by the statute were unconstitutional, and moved for a…
2Cases cited35 opinions
- Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, Administratrix of the Estate of CatrettSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Steel Co. v. Citizens for a Better EnvironmentSupreme Court of the United States · 1998
- Santosky v. KramerSupreme Court of the United States · 1982
- Roe v. WadeSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
30 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- Texas Medical Providers Performing Abortion Services v. LakeyCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 2012
- Planned Parenthood Minnesota v. Mike RoundsCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2012
- Planned Parenthood Minnesota v. RoundsCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2011
- Planned Parenthood Minnesota, North Dakota, South Dakota v. DaugaardDistrict Court, D. South Dakota · 2011
- PLANNED PARENTHOOD MN, ND, SD v. DaugaardDistrict Court, D. South Dakota · 2011
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.