Indiana Surrogacy Attorney Resigns Amid Disciplinary Probe

“The attorney in the middle of Indiana’s most contentious surrogacy adoption, a case that spanned a decade and three states, has resigned his law license in the midst of a disciplinary investigation.

The resignation of Steven C. Litz comes as an Indiana Supreme Court-ordered do-over in the controversial 2006 adoption case is pending in Hamilton Superior Court.

Litz, whose office was in Monrovia, resigned Dec. 17. The resignation include “an acknowledgement” of the pending disciplinary action “involving allegations of misconduct and that (Litz) could not successfully defend himself if prosecuted,” according to Supreme Court order accepting his resignation.

Litz declined to comment Tuesday on his resignation, but said it “had nothing to do” with the long-running adoption case.

The twin girls involved in that contested adoption case are now 10. They have lived most of their  lives with Stephen Melinger, who was a single, 58-year-old schoolteacher when he first attempted to adopt the children days after they were born in 2005.

The New Jersey man engaged Litz — who also operates Surrogate Mothers Inc., a business that assists individuals and couples have children with the help of surrogates and egg donors — to arrange the surrogacy with a South Carolina woman. After the children were born, Melinger adopted the pair in a Hamilton County proceeding that the Indiana Supreme Court overturned in 2009 because it did not comply with the Interstate Compact on the Placement of Children.

The adoption case blew up after Melinger showed up at Methodist Hospital with a bird in his pocket, raising concerns among medical staff about his “ability to appropriately care for the infants.” They contacted the Department of Child Services office in Marion County.

The agency opened a child abuse-neglect probe and a DCS investigator reported to the Marion County Juvenile Court that hospital personnel also were concerned because Melinger planned to drive the premature infants back to New Jersey without assistance and had not arranged for their care when he returned to his job as a teacher.

The Marion County Juvenile Court ruled the twins were Children in Need of Services and found that requirements of the compact, which governs terms of adoptions involving parties in multiple states, were not being followed. The newborns were briefly placed in foster care. [Surrogate Mothers did a homestudy for Melinger in a hotel room! ]

Meanwhile, the adoption case in Hamilton County continued with Litz representing Melinger.

The judge in that case struggled to deal with “successive shifting factual claims,” according to the 2009 Supreme Court ruling, including initial claims that Melinger lived in Indiana and provided the sperm used to impregnate the surrogate. In the end, it was revealed that neither Melinger nor the surrogate mother had any biological ties to the children — they had been conceived with sperm and eggs from other donors.

In January 2006, the Hamilton County judge ordered a six-month trial period placing the children with Melinger, who was monitored by a court-appointed child advocate. When he successfully completed that trial, the court approved Melinger’s adoption of the girls on Oct. 17, 2006.

The Department of Child Services appealed the adoption, but the Indiana Court of Appeals upheld the Hamilton County judge’s ruling. State child welfare officials then asked the Indiana Supreme Court to take the case.

In a 2009 ruling, the state’s high court overturned the adoption and ordered it to be redone to comply with guidelines of the interstate compact.

“The court observed that the petition to adopt and (Litz’s) subsequent submissions reflected ‘lack of candor and mass confusion of crucial factors,’ ” Chief Justice Randall Shepard wrote in the unanimous decision to throw out the adoption.

Kathryn Dolan, chief public information officer for the Supreme Court, said no other details about the disciplinary case that prompted Litz’s resignation are public records.

The Supreme Court order accepting his resignation says Litz is ineligible to seek reinstatement for five years.

Litz was disciplined at least three times previously by the Supreme Court, according to court records.

• In 1999, he received a public reprimand for writing a letter to a local newspaper stating his client had not committed a crime and criticizing a prosecutor’s decision to retry the person.

• Litz received another public reprimand in 2008 for improperly communicating with a person he knew was represented by another lawyer in a drug case.

• A third public reprimand was issued in 2010 for revealing information about current and former clients without their approval. That case involved boxes of records left next to a public recycling bin.”

Indiana Surrogacy Attorney Resigns Amid Disciniplinary Probe [Indianapolis Star 12/22/15 by Tim Evans]

REFORM Puzzle Piece