Difference between revisions of "Gajewski v. State of North Dakota (2010)"

From IntactiWiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(Wikify.)
m
 
(3 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)
Line 19: Line 19:
 
  |quote=
 
  |quote=
 
}}</ref>  
 
}}</ref>  
 
+
==Appeal==
Gajewski appealed the dismissal to the Supreme Court of North Dakota, however the dismissal was upheld.<ref>{{REFweb
+
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
 
  |url=https://law.justia.com/cases/north-dakota/supreme-court/2010/20100231.html
 
  |title=Gajewski v. State
 
  |title=Gajewski v. State
Line 40: Line 40:
 
{{SEEALSO}}
 
{{SEEALSO}}
 
* [[Fishbeck v. North Dakota]]
 
* [[Fishbeck v. North Dakota]]
 +
* [[United States of America]]
 
{{REF}}
 
{{REF}}
 +
 +
  
 
[[Category:Lawsuit]]
 
[[Category:Lawsuit]]
 
[[Category:Litigation over circumcision]]
 
[[Category:Litigation over circumcision]]
 +
[[Category:Pain]]
 +
 
[[Category:USA]]
 
[[Category:USA]]

Latest revision as of 21:57, 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