Judge: Colin Leis, Case: 24STCV04442, Date: 2025-01-15 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 24STCV04442    Hearing Date: January 15, 2025    Dept: 74

Eghbalieh v. Walker et al.

Defendant Wendy Ann Walker Demurrer and Motion to Strike

BACKGROUND 

            This case arises from a reproductive freedom action.

            Plaintiff Sammy Eghbalieh (Plaintiff) filed a complaint against defendants Wendy Ann Walker (Walker) and Madeline Ryan (Ryan) (Defendants).  Plaintiff alleges four causes of action: (1) Violation of the Constitutional Right to Reproductive Freedom, (2) Violation of Civil Code section 1708.5.6, (3) Permanent Injunction, and, (4) Declaratory Relief.

            Walker demurs to the entire complaint and moves to strike particular parts.

DISCUSSION

Demurrer

            Walker demurs to the Complaint generally on the grounds it fails to state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action and for being uncertain, ambiguous, and unintelligible.

            Violation of the Constitutional Right to Reproductive Freedom – First Cause of Action

            Walker demurs to the First Cause of Action on the grounds that (1) Walker is not a state actor and (2) Plaintiff fails to allege any state action violated his constitutional rights.

            The guiding law regarding the Constitutional law of Reproductive Freedom is the Reproductive Privacy Act.  The bill authorizes “a party whose rights are protected by the Reproductive Privacy Act to bring a civil action against an offending state actor when those rights are interfered with; and [authorizes] a person aggrieved by a violation of the Reproductive Privacy Act to bring a civil action pursuant to the Tom Bane Civil Rights Act.”  (Carpenter v. Superior Court (2023) 93 Cal.App.5th 1279, 1297.)  The Tom Bane Civil Rights Act permits an individual to bring suit in their own name against individuals for damages, injunctive relief and other appropriate relief to protect the exercise or enjoyment of the right.  (Civ. Code §§ 52.1(b), (c).)  Therefore, Plaintiff is not required to state a cause of action against a state actor to bring an action under the Reproductive Privacy Act. The Court overrules the demurrer to the First Cause of Action.

            Violation of Civil Code section 1708.5.6 – Second Cause of Action

            Walker demurs to the Second Cause of Action on the grounds that (1) Plaintiff fails to state facts supporting the elements of the cause of action and (2) Plaintiff fails to establish an embryo was implanted. 

            The violation of Civil Code section 1708.5.6 is a misuse of sperm, ova, or embryos and permits a private cause of action for a violation of Penal code section 367g.  (Civ. Code § 1708.5.6.)  The elements are (1) knowingly using sperm, ova or embryos (2) in assisted reproduction technology (3) for any purpose other than indicated by the sperm, ova or embryo provider’s signature on a written consent form.  (Penal Code section 367g.) 

            Plaintiff alleges that he is the sperm provider.  (Complaint ¶ 36.)  He also alleges that he has not consented to the use of his sperm.  (Complaint ¶ 37.)  And, finally, he alleges that Walker’s attempt to obtain control of the embryos and sperm violates Civil Code section 1708.5.6.  (Complaint ¶ 39.) Under the Penal Code, an attempt to commit a crime – even if unsuccessful – itself constitutes a crime. (Pen. Code § 664, 1159.) The Court overrules the demurrer to the second cause of action.

            Permanent Injunction – Third Cause of Action

            Walker demurs to the Third Cause of Action on the grounds that a permanent injunction is a remedy, not a cause of action.  Plaintiff requests permanent injunctive relief, relief which the Reproductive Privacy Act permits.

            Plaintiff alleges that Walker is attempting to use the fertilized eggs.  (Complaint ¶ 46.)  Injunctive relief may be granted “[w]hen it appears by the complaint that the plaintiff is entitled to the relief demanded, and the relief, or any part thereof, consists in restraining the commission of continuance of the act complained of.”  (Code of Civil Procedure § 526.)  Plaintiff’s First Cause of Action was overruled; therefore, the complaint’s request for injunctive relief is well-stated. The Court overrules the demurrer to injunctive relief.

            Declaratory Relief – Fourth Cause of Action

            Walker demurs to the Fourth Cause of Action on the grounds that Plaintiff failed to attach a copy of the contract between Walker and Plaintiff.

             Plaintiff alleges that Plaintiff and Walker were parties to a contract.  (Complaint ¶ 55.)  He further alleges he withdrew his consent under that contract.  (Complaint ¶ 57.)  Plaintiff requests a declaration as to who may use the fertilized embryos under the contract.  (Complaint ¶ 62.)  The Code of Civil Procedure allows for the Court to declare the rights or duties of parties interested in contracts.  (Code of Civil Procedure § 1060.) 

            For injunctive relief, Plaintiff is not required to provide a copy of the contract attached to the Complaint; it is sufficient to allege that a contract exists.  Walker contends that the threshold question is what the embryo disposition forms at the IVF clinic contained.  The contents and any legal rights that are or are not enforceable under the contract create a possible future controversy under Code of Civil Procedure section 1060.  (Environmental Defense Project v. County of Sierra (2008) 180 Cal.App.4th 728, 741-42.)  Plaintiff has alleged sufficient facts to establish that a contract existed; therefore, Plaintiff has met the burden to request declaratory relief.

Motion to Strike

            Walker moves to have the Court strike a number of allegations as irrelevant, false, or improper.  The Court denies the Motion to Strike except for the prayer for attorney’s fees, for which the Court gives Plaintiff leave to amend.

CONCLUSION

            The Court overrules the Demurrer in its entirety.

The Court strikes the prayer for attorney’s fees with 10 days leave to amend but otherwise denies the Motion to Strike.

Defendant shall file her answer per Code.

            Defendant to give notice.