A Texas trial straight out of a soap opera plot could have real-world implications for the fertility industry.

At issue is a Louisiana woman’s insemination with stored sperm that the donor, her ex-boyfriend, says she no had legal right to.

The donor’s previous ex-girlfriend agrees.

In 2002, live-in couple Layne Hardin and Katherine LeBlanc, had eight vials of Hardin’s sperm stored at a Houston sperm bank, now known as Texas Andrology Services, prior to his vasectomy.

After the couple broke up in 2006, Hardin began dating Tobie Devall. According to the lawsuit, the couple consulted with a fertility doctor in 2008 about the possibility of Devall getting pregnant with the sperm Hardin stored in 2002.

Not long after that, Hardin and Devall split. However according to the suit, in 2009 Devall acquired Hardin’s sperm from Texas Andrology Services and soon after used it to conceive a child that was born in 2010.

The lawsuit, filed by both Hardin and LeBlanc, seeks judgement against Devall as well as Texas Andrology Services for illegally dispensing Hardin’s sperm, the use of which they say was contractually dependent on their joint consent.

The case, which began last week, is the latest high-profile case to highlight the legal haziness of fertility disputes. However, according to Kim Muthcherson, a Rutgers University-Camden law professor specializing in bioetchics, most fertility cases between couples involve disputes over to storage of embryos, not sperm. 

In April, Nick Loeb, former fiance of actress Sofia Vergara, sued to prevent her from destroying the two frozen embryos the couple conceived through in vitro fertilization while they were engaged.

“It (the Texas trial) is a pretty unusual story,” Mutcherson said. “I keep up with this stuff pretty well and I haven’t seen this particular wrinkle before.”

In his opening statement, Devall’s attorney, Lee Hoffoss, claimed that text messages show that Hardin and Devall were still in the relationship on the day she was inseminated with Hardin’s sperm.

“Is this case about Kathy (LeBlanc) being angry because Layne (Hardin) left her for a much younger woman,” Hoffoss asked the jury. “You must question if this case is about the plaintiffs wanting to profit from the birth of a child.”

Jim Edwards, an attorney for Texas Andrology Services, says Hardin should have simply kept the sperm bank in the loop regarding his love life.

“All the sperm bank does is keep the stuff frozen, and when it gets an order from a doctor to dispense it, it dispenses,” Edwards said.

“Mr. Hardin has got some obligation to let people know he’s changed his mind,” Edwards said, adding “I think maybe Mr. Hardin maybe just had too many girlfriends.”

However, according to Mutcherson, Edwards’ clients have an even greater obligation to prevent unauthorized access to its clients’ sperm.

“It’s very unusual to release sperm to someone that’s not actually authorized to use it,” Mutcherson said. “I’m not sure what claim the sperm bank is going to make here.” 

Cade Bernsen, attorney for the plaintiffs, said his clients hope a ruling in their favor will ultimately lead to stricter regulations for sperm banks in Texas.

“There are more security checks in place for me going and buying alcohol at a gas station than there were for her (Devall) to receive a man’s DNA and the building blocks of life,” Bernsen said.