Stephen K. v. RONI L.
105 Cal. App. 3d 640, 31 A.L.R. 4th 383, 164 Cal. Rptr. 618 (1980)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
A person cannot hold their consensual sexual partner liable in tort for damages resulting from the birth of a child, even if the partner falsely represented that they were using contraception, because public policy and the right to privacy preclude judicial intervention in such intimate matters.
Facts:
- Stephen K. and Roni L. engaged in a consensual sexual relationship.
- Roni L. represented to Stephen K. that she was taking birth control pills.
- In reliance on this representation, Stephen K. engaged in sexual intercourse with Roni L.
- Roni L. conceived a child as a result of their intercourse.
- Stephen K. was legally established as the father and became obligated to provide financial support for the child.
Procedural Posture:
- The child's mother, Roni L., and a guardian ad litem filed a paternity suit against Stephen K. in the trial court.
- After admitting paternity, Stephen K. filed a cross-complaint against Roni L., alleging fraud, negligent misrepresentation, and negligence.
- Roni L. filed a motion for judgment on the pleadings, which the trial court treated as a general demurrer to Stephen K.'s cross-complaint.
- The trial court sustained the demurrer without leave to amend and entered a judgment of dismissal against Stephen K.
- Stephen K. (appellant) appealed the trial court's dismissal of his cross-complaint to the Court of Appeal.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Does a person have a legally recognized tort claim against their consensual sexual partner for damages resulting from the birth of a child conceived after the partner falsely represented that they were using contraception?
Opinions:
Majority - Beach, J.
No. A consensual sexual partner cannot be held liable in tort for the birth of a child conceived after a misrepresentation about contraceptive use. The court reasoned that recognizing such a claim would constitute an unwarranted governmental intrusion into the intensely private matters of sexual conduct and birth control decisions between consenting adults. Public policy dictates that courts should not attempt to define a standard of conduct for promises made in such an intimate context, as attempting to remedy such wrongs may cause more social harm than good. The court also noted that the plaintiff could have taken his own contraceptive precautions.
Analysis:
This decision establishes a strong public policy barrier against tort claims between sexual partners for misrepresentations about contraception, often termed "wrongful birth" or "fraudulent conception." By prioritizing the right to privacy over traditional tort principles, the court carves out an area of intimate personal conduct that it deems unsuitable for judicial regulation. This precedent solidifies the principle that individuals are personally responsible for their own contraceptive choices and cannot shift the financial consequences of an unplanned child to their partner through a tort lawsuit, even when deceit is involved. The ruling makes it exceptionally difficult for future litigants to succeed on similar claims, reinforcing a judicial reluctance to intervene in private sexual agreements.
Unlock the full brief for Stephen K. v. RONI L.