Skip to main content

EUBANKS v. III (2000)

Reset A A Font size: Print

United States Court of Appeals,Sixth Circuit.

Samuel G. EUBANKS, M.D., et al., Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. R. David STENGEL, Commonwealth Attorney for Jefferson County, et al., Defendants, A.B. Chandler, III, Attorney General of the Commonwealth of Kentucky, in his official capacity and his successors in office, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 98-6671.

Decided: July 31, 2000

Before:  GUY and CLAY, Circuit Judges;  BECKWITH,* District Judge. Kimberly A. Parker (briefed), Matthew P. Previn (briefed), Wilmer, Cutler & Pickering, A. Stephen Hut, Jr. (argued and briefed), Washington, DC, Carrie Y. Flaxman (briefed), Dechert, Price & Rhoads, Philadelphia, PA, Eve C. Gartner (briefed), Catherine Weiss (briefed), Jennifer Dalven (briefed), New York, NY, David A. Friedman (briefed), Fernandez, Friedman, Grossman & Kohn, Louisville, KY, for Plaintiffs-Appellees. Ann K. Benfield (briefed), Louisville, KY, Adam L. Frank (briefed), Schulte Roth & Zabel, New York, NY, for Amicus Curiae.


After reviewing the briefs and the record and having heard oral argument, we held this case in abeyance pending the decision by the United States Supreme Court in Stenberg v. Carhart, 530 U.S. 914, 120 S.Ct. 2597, 147 L.Ed.2d 743 (2000).   The appeal in Carhart involved a challenge to Nebraska's partial birth abortion statute and presented issues very similar to those involved in this challenge to the Kentucky partial birth abortion statute.

After carefully reviewing the decision in Carhart we conclude that it is controlling in this case, and that the district court was correct when it held that the Kentucky statute is unconstitutional.



Was this helpful?

Thank you. Your response has been sent.

Copied to clipboard