In Speranza v. Repro Lab Inc. , Mark Speranza deposited some semen specimens with Repro Labs right before undergoing surgery and signed a document directing Repro to destroy the specimens upon his death.
Months later, when Mark died, his parents inquired about the specimens and, although the company was unwilling to release them, Repro agreed to maintain the specimens as long as the family continued to pay the storage fees.
After several years, the Speranzas sought to have a surrogate inseminated with Mark's sperm. When Repro refused to cooperate, the Speranzas sued to recover Mark's specimens and sought a preliminary injunction preventing their disposal until a judicial determination could be secured.
When New York County Supreme Court declined to grant relief and dismissed the case, an appeal to the Appellate Division, First Department, followed.
The AD1 was of the view the New York State Department of Health Regulations and the terms of Mark's contract precluded the specimens from becoming part of Mark's estate.
Since Mark was a "semen depositor" rather than a "semen donor," and hadn't been examined or screened before his death nor tested for infectious diseases (as required by State regulations), the specimens couldn't be released.
The AD1 also thought the governing contract reinforced Mark's intention that his specimens were intended "to protect his ability to procreate if he survived, not to protect any possibility that his genetic or biological issue could be created after his death."
Was that a fitting climax to this case?
To download a copy of the Appellate Division's decision, please use this link: Speranza v. Repro Lab Inc.