Johnson v. Calvert

Supreme Court of California · 1993 · Contracts

ContractsPropertySurrogacyParentageReproductive TechnologyUniform Parentage Actnatural mothergestational surrogacy

Facts

Mark and Crispina Calvert entered into a contract with Anna Johnson under which an embryo created from Mark's sperm and Crispina's egg would be implanted in Johnson, who would carry the pregnancy and relinquish all parental rights after birth in exchange for compensation. After Johnson became pregnant, the parties' relationship deteriorated and Johnson demanded the remaining payments or she would refuse to surrender the child. The Calverts sued before birth, and after the child was born blood tests excluded Johnson as the genetic mother; the parties stipulated at trial that Mark and Crispina were the child's genetic parents. The trial court declared Mark and Crispina the child's natural parents and held the surrogacy contract legal and enforceable against Johnson's claims.

Issue

When, under a gestational surrogacy agreement, a child is genetically related to the intended wife but carried and delivered by another woman, who is the child's natural mother under California law? Also, does recognizing the genetic intended mother as the natural mother violate the gestational carrier's constitutional rights or California public policy?

Rule

Under California's Uniform Parentage Act, both genetic consanguinity and giving birth are means of establishing a mother and child relationship. When those means do not coincide in one woman, the natural mother is the woman who intended to procreate the child, meaning the woman who intended to bring about the birth of a child that she intended to raise as her own.

🔒

See the holding & full analysis

Create a free KwikCourt account to unlock the rest of this brief — and practice the case.

The court's holding and reasoning
Doctrine tests, pitfalls & exam hypotheticals
10 practice questions + 4 AI-graded essays on this case

Free sample · practice this case

Test yourself

One of 10 multiple-choice questions for this case. Pick an answer to see why.

In San Diego, Elena Ruiz and her husband, Victor Ruiz, created an embryo using Elena's egg and Victor's sperm. Under a written agreement, Maya Benton agreed to have the embryo implanted, carry the pregnancy, and deliver the child for compensation; after birth, Maya claimed she was the legal mother because she gave birth.

Under the governing California rule, who is the child's natural mother?

Explanation. The majority held that the Uniform Parentage Act recognizes both giving birth and genetic consanguinity as means of establishing maternity. But because California recognizes only one natural mother, when one woman is the genetic mother and another is the gestational mother, the tie is broken by intent: the natural mother is the woman who intended to procreate the child, meaning intended to bring about the birth of a child she intended to raise as her own. That is Elena here.