Jordan Schnitzer’s wife was Mina Morvai, a Sacramento real estate developer he married on June 30, 1996; the couple later divorced under a stipulated judgment, and the split touched off years of litigation over property lines and legal fees. A separate custody fight with a later girlfriend, Cory Noel Sause, over a child born through surrogacy produced a landmark Oregon Supreme Court ruling on the parental rights of egg donors.
The Marriage to Mina Morvai
Schnitzer and Morvai held their wedding reception at the Palace Hotel in San Francisco in 1996.1SFGate. Honey, They’re Playing Our Song The dissolution judgment that eventually ended the marriage divided several Portland-area properties. Morvai received Schnitzer’s one-half interest in the couple’s marital residence on Hessler Drive. Schnitzer and his company, Harsch Investment Properties Management, LLC, received two adjoining houses.2Oregon Judicial Department. In re Marriage of Schnitzer, Appellate Brief
Property Disputes After the Divorce
The settlement did not end things. Three narrow strips of land next to the Hessler Drive property became the subject of supplemental proceedings.
- The tennis strip was ruled part of the marital residence and belonged to Morvai.
- On the Northwood strip, the court found that a retaining wall Schnitzer had built encroached on Morvai’s land. Instead of ordering removal, it directed Schnitzer to pay her $28,000.
- The fence strip, the most contested piece, contained a drainage system that had served the Hessler Drive property since 1952. The trial court ruled that Harsch Investment Properties had acquired this strip through adverse possession and that it did not belong to Morvai.3Oregon Judicial Department. Schnitzer v. Schnitzer, Appellate Brief
Morvai alleged that Schnitzer had breached the divorce agreement by conveying the Hessler Drive property through a bargain-and-sale deed instead of the warranty deed referenced in the settlement, and by directing Harsch to claim the fence strip. The trial court consolidated Harsch’s quiet-title action with the divorce proceedings and granted summary judgment for Schnitzer and Harsch on the fence strip.
Who Pays the Attorney Fees
The original divorce judgment awarded reasonable attorney fees to the “predominately prevailing party” in any post-judgment dispute. On September 27, 2016, the trial court entered a supplemental judgment awarding Schnitzer $182,566.76 in attorney fees and $1,100 in costs. The court found Schnitzer was the predominately prevailing party because he had won the fence strip dispute, which it identified as the issue of highest priority to both sides.2Oregon Judicial Department. In re Marriage of Schnitzer, Appellate Brief
Morvai appealed. She argued that a straight count of claims showed she had won two of three disputes and should have been deemed the prevailing party. Schnitzer argued the court was right to weigh the relative importance of the issues rather than tally wins. On January 29, 2020, the Oregon Court of Appeals affirmed, holding that the fee provision gave the trial court discretion to evaluate the relief obtained against the relief requested, and that treating the fence strip as the most significant issue was not an abuse of that discretion.4Findlaw. In re Marriage of Schnitzer5Oregon Courts. Court of Appeals Opinions and Orders
The Later Custody Fight With Cory Sause
Morvai is the only person Schnitzer has married in the record, but a later relationship produced the family dispute most searchers encounter. Beginning in January 2014, Schnitzer dated Cory Noel Sause, an executive at a Coos Bay tugboat company roughly 30 years his junior.6Willamette Week. Jordan Schnitzer Gets a Son and a Court Battle
On June 2, 2014, the couple signed a contract to conceive a child using Sause’s eggs and Schnitzer’s sperm, carried by a gestational surrogate. The agreement specified that only male embryos would be implanted through pre-implantation genetic diagnosis. Schnitzer relinquished any claim to female embryos or female offspring. Sause agreed to relinquish rights to any male embryo, though her attorneys later argued she had not explicitly renounced rights to a male child once born.
The relationship ended during the summer of 2015 as the pregnancy progressed. Sause said in later court filings that she had pulled away because she “did not want to marry Mr. Schnitzer or share a life with him,” despite his proposals.7Daily Astorian. Jordan Schnitzer Gets a Son and a Court Battle The child, a boy, was born on December 22, 2015, at Samaritan Albany General Hospital in Linn County.
Parentage Petition and Early Rulings
On the day of the birth, Schnitzer filed a petition in Multnomah County Circuit Court to be declared the child’s sole parent. The filing did not mention Sause’s role in the conception, and within a week the court certified Schnitzer as the sole genetic parent. Sause, who had been at the hospital for the birth, was reportedly shocked to find her name absent from the birth certificate.
On March 3, 2016, Sause filed a challenge seeking recognition as the child’s legal mother, visitation rights, and placement of her name on the birth certificate. Schnitzer maintained she had signed away her rights and had not allowed her to see the child since the birth.8The Oregonian. Cost of Baby Battle: $269,000 in Attorneys’ Fees By October 2016, Schnitzer had spent at least $269,000 on legal fees; Sause reported spending roughly $100,000 less.
The trial court initially ruled for Sause, concluding that her genetic connection to the child established her as a legal parent under a “biology-plus” standard drawn from the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Lehr v. Robertson. The Oregon Court of Appeals reversed, holding that a genetic connection alone did not confer parental rights and that Sause had failed to establish those rights given her contractual renunciation of custodial claims.9The Oregonian. Well-Known Portland Developer Jordan Schnitzer Wins Fight to Remain a Single Dad
The Oregon Supreme Court Decision
On November 28, 2023, the Oregon Supreme Court issued its decision in In re: the Parentage of S.D.S., affirming that Sause’s genetic connection to the child did not establish her legal parentage. The Court reasoned that Oregon law has historically tied legal parentage to birth and marriage rather than purely to gamete contribution, and that Sause’s voluntary relinquishment of custodial rights in the contract weighed against her claim. It also held that Senate Bill 512, a 2017 law governing assisted-reproduction parentage, did not apply retroactively.10Findlaw. In re Parentage of S.D.S.
The Court did not entirely foreclose Sause’s claims. It remanded the case so the trial court could consider whether she holds enforceable “nonparental rights” under the contract she signed with Schnitzer, such as limited visitation or contact. Oregon courts had not previously addressed whether an egg donor can seek such rights based on a private agreement with the intended parent. The outcome of those further proceedings has not been publicly reported.