Deborah Ellen Hecht v.

William Everett Kane, Jr

Court of Appeals, Second District, California 1996
59 Cal. RPTR. 2D 222

Issue: Are the vials of sperm Hechts property?

Ruling: Hecht is entitled to the sperm.

Reasoning: Sperm unlike other property is not subject to division through an
agreement among the potential beneficiaries. The descendants intent for leaving
the vials before he committed suicide was clearly to produce a child with Hecht and
only her. He signed many forms and letters that made this clear. The sperm is not an
asset of the estate to be split up and given to anyone besides Hecht. Therefore the
children William Everett Kane Jr. and Katherine Kane cannot keep any of the vials of
sperm to prevent Hecht from conceiving a child with it.