Gajewski v. State of North Dakota (2010): Difference between revisions
WikiModEn2 (talk | contribs) Add citation. |
WikiModEn2 (talk | contribs) mNo edit summary |
||
| (11 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
'''{{FULLPAGENAME}}''' is a circumcision lawsuit from the state of North Dakota. | |||
'''{{FULLPAGENAME}}''' is a circumcision lawsuit from the state of North Dakota.<ref>{{REFweb | |||
Mervin Gajewski, 78, was in a Watford City hospital when he heard the blood-curdling screams of a newborn boy who was suffering the extreme [[pain]] of an unanesthetized, medically-unnecessary, non-therapeutic [[circumcision]]. He later decided to sue the State of North Dakota in an effort to get these cruel procedures halted in North Dakota. The court, however, ruled that a 78-year-old man was not representative of newborn infant [[intact]] boys so he lacked standing to sue and his case was dismissed.<ref>{{REFnews | |||
|title=North Dakota Man Sues to Stop Infant Circumcision | |||
|url=https://www.cirp.org/news/2005/2005-05-22_theforum.php | |||
|last=Warden | |||
|first=James | |||
|init= | |||
|author-link= | |||
|last2= | |||
|init2= | |||
|author2-link= | |||
|publisher=The Forum | |||
|website= | |||
|date=2005 | |||
|season= | |||
|accessdate=2023-08-07 | |||
|format= | |||
|quote= | |||
}}</ref> | |||
==Appeal== | |||
Gajewski appealed the dismissal to the [https://www.ndcourts.gov/supreme-court Supreme Court of North Dakota], however the dismissal was upheld.<ref>{{REFweb | |||
|url=https://law.justia.com/cases/north-dakota/supreme-court/2010/20100231.html | |||
|title=Gajewski v. State | |||
|last=Anonymous | |||
|first= | |||
|init= | |||
|publisher=Justia | |||
|date=2010 | |||
|accessdate=2023-08-07 | |||
}}</ref> <ref>{{REFweb | |||
|url=https://caselaw.findlaw.com/court/nd-supreme-court/1549480.html | |url=https://caselaw.findlaw.com/court/nd-supreme-court/1549480.html | ||
|title=Mervin Gajewski as next friend of all North Dakotans including intact minor males, Plaintiff and Appellant v. Wayne Stenehjem, Attorney General, Defendants and Appellees (2010) | |title=Mervin Gajewski as next friend of all North Dakotans including intact minor males, Plaintiff and Appellant v. Wayne Stenehjem, Attorney General, Defendants and Appellees (2010) | ||
| Line 6: | Line 35: | ||
|date=2010 | |date=2010 | ||
|accessdate=2023-08-07 | |accessdate=2023-08-07 | ||
}}</ref> | }}</ref> | ||
The case was dismissed based on procedural issues. The merits of the case were never considered by any court. | |||
{{SEEALSO}} | |||
* [[Fishbeck v. North Dakota]] | |||
* [[United States of America]] | |||
{{REF}} | |||
[[Category:Lawsuit]] | [[Category:Lawsuit]] | ||
[[Category:Litigation over circumcision]] | |||
[[Category:Pain]] | |||
[[Category:USA]] | [[Category:USA]] | ||
Latest revision as of 20:57, 26 April 2024
Gajewski v. State of North Dakota (2010) is a circumcision lawsuit from the state of North Dakota.
Mervin Gajewski, 78, was in a Watford City hospital when he heard the blood-curdling screams of a newborn boy who was suffering the extreme pain of an unanesthetized, medically-unnecessary, non-therapeutic circumcision. He later decided to sue the State of North Dakota in an effort to get these cruel procedures halted in North Dakota. The court, however, ruled that a 78-year-old man was not representative of newborn infant intact boys so he lacked standing to sue and his case was dismissed.[1]
Appeal
Gajewski appealed the dismissal to the Supreme Court of North Dakota, however the dismissal was upheld.[2] [3]
The case was dismissed based on procedural issues. The merits of the case were never considered by any court.
See also
References
- ↑
Warden, James (2005)."North Dakota Man Sues to Stop Infant Circumcision", The Forum. Retrieved 7 August 2023.
- ↑
Anonymous (2010). Gajewski v. State
, Justia. Retrieved 7 August 2023. - ↑
(2010). Mervin Gajewski as next friend of all North Dakotans including intact minor males, Plaintiff and Appellant v. Wayne Stenehjem, Attorney General, Defendants and Appellees (2010)
, Findlaw. Retrieved 7 August 2023.