Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Anderson v. Anderson-Harrison

Superior Court of Delaware, New Castle

August 15, 2013

RICKY ANDERSON, Plaintiff,
v.
CLASSIE ANDERSON-HARRISON, Defendant.

Submitted: June 18, 2013

Upon Consideration of Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment.

Shawn Dougherty, Esquire, WEIK NITSCHE & DOUGHERTY, Wilmington, Delaware.

Norman E. Levine, Esquire, NORMAN E. LEVINE, ATTORNEY AT LAW, Wilmington, Delaware.

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Charles E. Butler Judge

INTRODUCTION

Before the Court is the motion of defendant Classie Anderson-Harrison for summary judgment. Defendant alleges that the statute of limitations expired before plaintiff filed his complaint and it must therefore be dismissed. For the reasons set forth below, the Court finds plaintiff's complaint was filed after the statute of limitations had run and accordingly, defendant's motion is hereby GRANTED.

FACTUAL BACKGROUND

As the nonmoving party, plaintiff's allegations and all inferences reasonably deduced there from are taken as true for the purposes of deciding the instant motion. Taken together, plaintiff's complaint is as follows.

Plaintiff says that he and defendant Classie Anderson-Harrison were romantically involved and maintained a sexual relationship in 2007, ending in early 2008. Late in 2007, however, defendant informed plaintiff that she was with child and the plaintiff was the father of said child. After their romantic relationship ended in early 2008, defendant told plaintiff that she was a carrier of cystic fibrosis and that a doctor required a sperm sample from plaintiff in order to rule out the possibility that the fetus would be similarly afflicted.[1]

At the direction of defendant, the plaintiff reported to the Delaware Institute for Reproductive Medicine P.A. where he made a sperm donation for the purported purpose of determining whether the fetus had cystic fibrosis. Defendant was present and took the sample in to the doctor. A week later, a woman who plaintiff believed to be a nurse from the reproductive institute informed plaintiff that the doctor had determined that the previous sample was deficient and he needed to return to provide a second specimen. Accordingly, on February 8, 2008, plaintiff duly returned to the clinic to provide a second sperm sample and again, defendant took the sample from him and went in to see the doctor.

The discriminating reader may have already figured out that, at least according to the plaintiff, defendant Classie Anderson-Harrison was not in fact pregnant in late 2007 as she reported to the plaintiff. Rather, this was all a ruse by the defendant to obtain a sperm sample from the plaintiff with which to impregnate herself. The "nurse" referred to above was not a nurse from the doctor's office at all but a confederate of the defendant. Dr. Jeffrey Russell[2] of the Delaware Institute for Reproductive Medicine P.A., apparently utilizing sperm procured by defendant Classie Anderson-Harrison in this manner, performed an intrauterine insemination on defendant and she became pregnant by plaintiff's sperm.

In early August, 2008, plaintiff was alerted that he may have been "had." While not entirely clear from the record thus far, it may have been defendant's cousin who alerted plaintiff.[3] In any event, plaintiff sought out Dr. Russell and met with him for the first time on August 8, 2008. At that time, Dr. Russell informed plaintiff that he was on track to become a father via the donated sperm. Plaintiff testified that Dr. Russell told him he had attempted the intrauterine insemination on defendant with "three or four" samples provided by defendant which, plaintiff tells us, left his paternal situation at least somewhat ambiguous, as he could only account for two samples.[4]

These are the salient facts for purposes of this motion. Defendant went on to give birth on October 23, 2008, there was a paternity test confirming plaintiff's fatherhood in February, 2009, and ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.