1) Did a contract exist between Dunston and Szafranski? If there was a contract, what type was it and why?

2) Did the May 2010 "break up text" have any effect on the signed fertility clinic consent form, why or why not?

3) Discuss the elements of contract law that apply to this case, with detailed explanations of each, and present an argument based on the law of contracts, regarding who should win this case.
 

The above story is the series of events in a real life case. Dr. Karla Dunston is the woman who as a result of her cancer treatment cannot have a child other than with the frozen embryos. The father is Jacob Szafranski, a nurse, paramedic & firefighter. The judge ruled that the verbal contract the couple had made when Szafranski agreed to father embryos with Dunston was binding and that the woman's wish to procreate (to have children) outweigh the man's desire not to procreate. What's unique about this case from previous ones is that the couple here were never married (is that an important fact, why or why not?). In 2010, the couple went to a Chicago fertility clinic and signed a consent form that stated that no embryo could be used without permission of both parties unless there is another contract or divorce decree. An attorney drafted a co-parenting agreement for the couple that stated Szafranski would undertake any obligations no matter what happened in their relationship and that Dunston would have all control over the embryos. That contract was never signed. In April 2010, both individuals made their donations. In May 2010, Szafranski initiated the break up. In August 2011, he filed suit to prevent Dunston from using the embryos saying that he had changed his mind. Dunston countersued for sole custody of the embryos and won. Szafranski appealed the case.