| A federal appeals court has upheld a lower court's decision to dismiss a lawsuit filed by a men's rights group on behalf of a man who said he shouldn't have to pay child support for his ex-girlfriend's daughter. The 6th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals, in a decision released Tuesday, agreed with U.S. District Judge David Lawson in Bay City that Matthew Dubay's suit was frivolous and ordered him to pay attorney fees to the state. However, the three-member appeals court panel declined to award the state attorney fees for the appeal. Dubay, a 25-year-old from Saginaw Township, had said his ex-girlfriend, Lauren Wells, knew he didn't want to have a child and she assured him repeatedly she couldn't get pregnant because of a medical condition. He argued that if a pregnant woman can choose among abortion, adoption or raising a child, a man involved in an unintended pregnancy should have the choice of declining the financial responsibilities of fatherhood. But Lawson disagreed and rejected Dubay's argument that Michigan's paternity law violates the U.S. Constitution's equal protection clause. The National Center for Men in Old Bethpage, N.Y. -- which prepared the suit -- nicknamed it "Roe v. Wade for Men" because it involves the issue of male reproductive rights. The nickname drew objections from women's rights organizations. Dubay sued the Saginaw County prosecutor and Wells in March, contesting an order to pay $500 a month in child support for a girl born to Wells in 2005. Michigan Attorney General Mike Cox later intervened in the case and argued for its dismissal.
Dubay previously had acknowledged the suit was a long shot.
|
Lawyer News RSS
