RICHMOND MEDICAL CENTER FOR WOMEN v. HICKS

Nos. 03-1821, 04-1255.

409 F.3d 619 (2005)

RICHMOND MEDICAL CENTER FOR WOMEN; William G. Fitzhugh, M.D., on behalf of themselves, their staffs, and their patients, Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. David M. HICKS, in his official capacity as Commonwealth Attorney for the City of Richmond; Wade A. Kizer, in his official capacity as Commonwealth Attorney for the County of Henrico, Defendants-Appellants. Horatio R. Storer Foundation, Incorporated, Amicus Supporting Appellants, and Physicians For Reproductive Choice And Health; Vanessa E. Cullins, Vice President for Medical Affairs, Planned Parenthood Federation of America; Forty-Two Individual Physicians, Amici Supporting Appellees.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Decided: June 3, 2005.


Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

William Eugene Thro, Deputy State Solicitor, Office of the Attorney General of Virginia, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellants.

Suzanne Novak, Center for Reproductive Law and Policy, New York, New York, for Appellees.

Jerry W. Kilgore, Attorney General of Virginia, Judith Williams Jagdmann, Deputy Attorney General, David E. Johnson, Deputy Attorney General, Edward M. Macon, Senior Assistant Attorney General, James C. Stuchell, Assistant Attorney General, Anthony P. Meredith, Assistant Attorney General, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellants.

Priscilla J. Smith, Center for Reproductive Law and Policy, New York, New York, for Appellees.

James Bopp, Jr., Richard E. Coleson, Thomas J. Marzen, Jeffrey P. Gallant, Bopp, Coleson & Bostrom, Terre Haute, Indiana, for Amicus Supporting Appellants.

David S. Cohen, Women's Law Project, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania; Susan Frietsche, Stacey I. Young, Women's Law Project, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, for Amici Supporting Appellees.

Before NIEMEYER, MICHAEL, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges.


Affirmed by published opinion. Judge MICHAEL wrote the majority opinion, in which Judge MOTZ joined. Judge NIEMEYER wrote a dissenting opinion.

OPINION

MICHAEL, Circuit Judge.

This case involves a facial challenge under the Fourteenth Amendment to a Virginia statute that attempts to criminalize "partial birth abortion," which the statute terms "partial birth infanticide." In a summary judgment order the district court declared the statute invalid...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases