# J.B. v. M.B.

> Supreme Court of New Jersey · August 14, 2001 · 170 N.J. 9

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/7326515

## Case

- **Full name:** J.B., PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT v. M.B., AND C.C.
- **Court:** Supreme Court of New Jersey
- **Decided:** August 14, 2001
- **Citations:** 170 N.J. 9; 783 A.2d 707; 2001 N.J. LEXIS 955
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurrence by Verniero
- **Judges:** Poritz, Verniero, Zazzali
- **Cited by:** 36 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/7326515

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- holding that a mutual change of mind is not required and that agreements entered into at the time of IVF will be enforced “subject to the right of either party to change his or her mind about disposition up to the point of use or destruction of any stored [embryos]”

## Opinion text

VERNIERO, J.,
concurring.
I join in the disposition of this case and in all but one aspect of the Court’s opinion. I do not agree with the Court’s suggestion, in dicta, that the right to procreate may depend on adoption as a consideration. Ante at 30, 783 A.2d at 720.
I also write to express my view that the same principles that compel the outcome in this case would permit an infertile party to assert his or her right to use a preembryo against the objections of the other party, if such use were the only means of procreation. *31 In that instance, the balance arguably would weigh in favor of the infertile party absent countervailing factors of greater weight. I do not decide that profound question today, and the Court should not decide it or suggest a result, because it is absent from this case.
Justice ZAZZALI joins in this opinion.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/7326515. Public record. Not legal advice.