Legal Opinion

In Re Roberto D.B.

Court of Appeals of Maryland

Decided May 16, 2007No. 110, Sept. Term, 2002PublishedCited by 14 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

*270BELL, C.J.

This case compels the Court to consider the ever-continuing development of artificial reproductive technologies. In the last two decades, methods of producing a child have advanced beyond the traditional realm. In a traditional surrogacy context, the egg donor, who is also the carrier of the child, or the “gestational carrier,” is artificially inseminated with the sperm of the intended father, carries the child to term, and then relinquishes parental rights after birth, with the father acknowledging paternity and taking custody of the child; his spouse typically adopts the child. In…

2Cases cited30 opinions

  1. Deems v. Western Maryland Railway Co.Court of Appeals of Maryland · 1967
  2. Ross v. HoffmanCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1977
  3. Johnson v. CalvertCalifornia Supreme Court · 1993
  4. Taylor v. TaylorCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1986
  5. Rand v. RandCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1977

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

3Cited by14 opinions

  1. D.M.T. v. T.M.H.Supreme Court of Florida · 2013
  2. Thompson v. State Farm Mutual Automobile InsuranceCourt of Special Appeals of Maryland · 2010
  3. In re the Parentage of a Child by T.J.S.New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 2011
  4. Sieglein v. SchmidtCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2016
  5. (2008), Maryland Attorney General Reports2008

9 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