Jane Doe v. Michelle Chapman, No. 21-1692 (8th Cir. 2022)
Annotate this Case
Under Michigan abortion law, a minor may bypass the parental-consent requirement by obtaining a court order granting the right to self-consent (for mature minors) or judicial consent (for “best interests” minors). When the plaintiff sought to apply for judicial bypass, the defendant hadn’t heard of the process and told the plaintiff to come back later. Plaintiff sued the defendant in her individual and official capacities under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, alleging that defendant’s refusal to allow her to apply for a judicial bypass without parental notification violated her Fourteenth Amendment rights. The district court denied the motion when the defendant moved for summary judgment, invoking quasi-judicial and qualified immunity.
Before the Eighth Circuit, the defendant claimed she acted at the direction of the Associate Circuit Judge (“Judge”). The Judge testified that he did not recall telling the defendant not to accept the application without parental consent. The circuit court concluded there was a genuine issue of material fact regarding the Judge’s practice of giving pre-filing directions. Further, the is a clearly established right to apply for a judicial bypass. Thus the circuit court declined to address the defendant’s other arguments regarding qualified immunity.
Court Description: [Benton, Author, with Shepherd and Stras, Circuit Judges] Civil Case - civil rights. The district court denied summary judgment on the basis of qualified immunity to a circuit clerk who refused to allow a minor to apply for a judicial bypass without parental notification before obtaining an abortion, concluding material facts existed whether the circuit clerk was acting at the direction of the circuit judge. Lack of memory, alone, does not create a genuine dispute, but evidence relating to a person's habit or routine practice is admissible and relevant for determining disputed facts and whether a jury could conclude that based on the regular practice of not giving pre-filing directions, the judge did not give a pre-filing direction to the circuit clerk on this occasion. The district court did not err in denying summary judgment. The minor's constitutional right to apply for judicial bypass without notifying her parents is clearly established by Supreme Court precedent. Judge Stras dissents.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.