Lawyer vs Judge, Lawyer 1
She still thinks Litz and his company violated interstate laws meant to ensure children placed for adoption across state lines end up in safe homes. She also reiterated her claim that the Internet site for Litz’s company promotes insurance fraud by encouraging surrogate mothers to bill their insurers for pre- and postnatal care and infant deliveries.U.S. Attorney Susan Brooks has asked the FBI to look into Litz and his company in response to Moores’ request last month. The FBI has been following up to determine whether a full-blown probe is warranted, said agent Wendy Osborne, spokeswoman for the Indianapolis office. Litz has disputed Moores’ characterization, in her letter to the federal prosecutor, of surrogacy as a form of felony “child selling.”
The public comments elicited a request from Litz that the judge step out of the welfare case, and she has complied: Judge quits child welfare case.
The Star article also reports that Judge Payne (now DCS Director Payne), has taken a personal interest in the case: “I can’t acknowledge there’s a case I’m involved in,” Payne said. “But if I became involved in a case, it is because it has importance to the agency.”
Understanding the situation from the outside is complicated by the privacy laws restricting release of information both in child welfare cases and adoption cases, but I think the situation, with the allegations of the judge and the FBI investigation, highlights the dangers of doing legal work in the surrogacy field. It is one of the areas of the law where legitimate activities are fenced on either side with felonies, and sometimes the lines get awful grey.
