04.06.2013 Views

State of New York - courses.cit.cornell.edu - Cornell University

State of New York - courses.cit.cornell.edu - Cornell University

State of New York - courses.cit.cornell.edu - Cornell University

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

STATE OF NEW YORK<br />

SUPREME COURT: COUNTY OF TOMPKINS<br />

====================================<br />

JASON SEYMOUR, JASON HUNGERFORD,<br />

SUSAN MARTIN, KRISTINE SHAW, MARGOT<br />

CHIUTEN, SHAWNA BLACK, JAMES PELTON,<br />

JASON THORNTON, PATRICIA FLERY,<br />

ELIZABETH COHEN, PATRICIA BUTLER,<br />

MARJORIE PARKER, SANDRA FENTIMAN,<br />

ALICE KENLY, TODD HERON, RONALD<br />

CAMPBELL, LISA BUSHLOW, NINA PANZER,<br />

TERESA NIEDZIALEK, NANCY CHAPMAN,<br />

ANNE BELL, ELISABETH LINDSAY, BRENDA<br />

MARSTON, SARAH SIMPKINS, JOHN HOUSTON,<br />

DAVE HEBRON, DEBORAH VOGEL, SILVIA<br />

GARCIA, CARLA CARICK, LAURIE KOEHLER,<br />

LAWRENCE ROBERTS, OSCAR HAARSTAD,<br />

KIM TRAHAN, CHRISTINA KNICKERBOCKER,<br />

LEE WILLIAMS, BETH DIPASQUA, NANCY<br />

GABRIEL, MARION DAGROSSA, JOSEPH<br />

WHEELER, DAVID BIDDLE, SUZANNE<br />

SCHWARTZ, MARY WHITE, RODNEY<br />

FAIRBANKS, BRENT WANDEL, AMELIA<br />

SAUTER, LEAH HOUGHTALING, MARTHA<br />

HARDESTY, JOANN EDWARDS, SARAH B.<br />

JEFFERIS, and TAMMY J. TRAVIS,<br />

Plaintiffs, COMPLAINT<br />

-against- Index # 2004-<br />

JULIE HOLCOMB as CITY CLERK <strong>of</strong> the<br />

CITY OF ITHACA; CITY OF ITHACA; and<br />

NEW YORK STATE DEPARTMENT OF<br />

HEALTH,<br />

Defendants.<br />

====================================<br />

Plaintiffs, by and through their attorneys, Bixler and Stumbar, LLP and Mariette Geldenhuys, as<br />

and for their complaint herein, allege as follows:<br />

mg\litigat\SameSex.com<br />

THE PARTIES<br />

1. The twenty-five couples who are plaintiffs in this action represent the same diversity <strong>of</strong> ages, jobs<br />

and <strong>edu</strong>cational background as any twenty-five randomly selected heterosexual couples. They are,<br />

for example, teachers, attorneys, social workers, librarians, nurses, business people, students and<br />

- Page 1 -


stay-at-home moms. The difference is that these couples are being denied basic civil rihts<br />

afforded to married couples in <strong>New</strong> <strong>York</strong>.<br />

2. Plaintiffs Jason Seymour and Jason Hungerford are in their twenties and have been together since<br />

1998. Both are employed in the technology field.<br />

3. Plaintiffs Susan Martin and Kristine Shaw are the parents <strong>of</strong> two children, ages 13 and 11. They<br />

have been together for approximately eight years. Susan is a psychologist and Kristine is an<br />

attorney.<br />

4. Plaintiffs Margot Chiuten and Shawna Black are in their twenties and have been together for more<br />

than seven years. They own a home together and plan on having children. Margot is a landscape<br />

architect and Shawna works for Alterra Healthcare.<br />

5. Plaintiffs James Pelton and Jason Thornton have been together for more than six years. James has<br />

degrees in electronics engineering and computer science. Jason is studying graphic design and<br />

computer graphics.<br />

6. Plaintiffs Patricia Flery and Elizabeth Cohen have been together for seven years and have a three-<br />

year-old daughter. Patricia is an <strong>edu</strong>cator and counselor, and Elizabeth works as a school social<br />

worker.<br />

7. Plaintiffs Patricia Butler and Marjorie Parker have been together for seven years. Patricia is a<br />

registered nurse and Marjorie is a medical social worker.<br />

8. Plaintiffs Sandra Fentiman and Alice Kenly each have grown children. They have been together<br />

since 1998.<br />

9. Plaintiffs Todd Heron and Ronald Campbell have been together for 24 years. Todd is employed<br />

by the Ithaca Bakery and Ronald is employed at Alternatives Federal Credit Union.<br />

10. Plaintiffs Lisa Bushlow and Nina Panzer have been together for more than six years and have a<br />

two-year-old son. Lisa is employed at the Hangar Theatre. Nina is a full-time mother and part-<br />

mg\litigat\SameSex.com<br />

- Page 2 -


time college instructor.<br />

11. Plaintiffs Teresa Niedzialek and Nancy Chapman have been together for five years. They are both<br />

employed by Wegmans Food Markets.<br />

12. Plaintiffs Anne Bell and Elisabeth Lindsay have been together since 2001. Anne is the mother <strong>of</strong><br />

two grown children and is a high school librarian. Elisabeth is a registered nurse. They own two<br />

homes together.<br />

13. Plaintiffs Brenda Marston and Sarah Simpkins are the parents <strong>of</strong> a four-year-old son. They have<br />

been together for 13 years and have owned a home together since 1993. Brenda is an archivist and<br />

academic librarian at <strong>Cornell</strong> <strong>University</strong>. Sarah is an assistant dean at <strong>Cornell</strong> <strong>University</strong>.<br />

14. Plaintiffs John Houston and Dave Hebron have been together for six years. Both John and Dave<br />

are employed in the food service industry.<br />

15. Plaintiffs Deborah Vogel and Silvia Garcia are both 50 years old and have been together for 15<br />

years. They describe themselves as an “average American couple.” They pay taxes, volunteer in<br />

their community and are planning for their retirement together.<br />

16. Plaintiffs Carla Carick and Laurie Koehler have been together 10 years and have raised Carla’s<br />

birth son together since he was eleven years old.. He is now twenty-one and a sophomore at the<br />

<strong>University</strong> <strong>of</strong> Virginia, which is where both <strong>of</strong> his moms went to school. He is totally supportive<br />

<strong>of</strong> his moms’ getting married to each other.<br />

17. Plaintiffs Lawrence Roberts & Oscar Haarstad have been together for over 17 years. This couple<br />

has done much for their community. Oscar (“Ross”) co-founded AIDS Work, a local organization<br />

dealing with AIDS related issues and Larry is the program director for the Finger Lakes<br />

Independence Center and chairs the City <strong>of</strong> Ithaca Disability Advisory Board.<br />

18. Plaintiffs Kim Trahan and Christina Knickerbocker have been together for ten years. One is a<br />

physician’s assistant and the other is employed at Binghamton <strong>University</strong>.<br />

mg\litigat\SameSex.com<br />

- Page 3 -


19. Plaintiffs Lee Williams and Beth DiPasqua are in their twenties and have been together 2 ½ years.<br />

Lee is working towards her bachelor’s degree and Beth works in a pet store.<br />

20. Plaintiffs Nancy Gabriel and Marion DaGrossa are in their sixties and both have retired from<br />

teaching. They are the mothers <strong>of</strong> five children and four grandchildren and have been together<br />

more than eleven years. They are Quakers and long time members <strong>of</strong> the Ithaca Meeting <strong>of</strong> the<br />

Religious Society <strong>of</strong> Friends.<br />

21. Plaintiffs Joseph Wheeler and David Biddle have been together for 2 ½ years. Joseph is an<br />

attorney at a prestigious law firm in Elmira and David is a PhD. candidate in mathematics at<br />

<strong>Cornell</strong> <strong>University</strong>.<br />

22. Plaintiffs Suzanne Schwartz and Mary White have been together for over six years and are<br />

registered as Domestic Partners at <strong>Cornell</strong> <strong>University</strong>.<br />

23. Plaintiffs Rodney Fairbanks and Brent Wandel have been together two years, Brent having moved<br />

from Michigan to be with his partner. Brent is currently a student and Rodney has worked for the<br />

United <strong>State</strong>s Postal Service for over nine years.<br />

24. Plaintiffs Amelia Sauter and Leah Houghtaling have been together for eight years and co-own<br />

their house and their car. Amelia is a social worker and Beth is a business manager.<br />

25. Plaintiffs Martha Hardesty and Joann Edwards have been together for 5 ½ years and co-parent two<br />

<strong>of</strong> Joann’s children. Martha is a teacher and Joann is a nurse.<br />

26. Plaintiffs Sarah B. Jefferis and Tammy J. Travis have been registered as domestic partners in the<br />

City <strong>of</strong> Ithaca since 2000. Sarah is an assistant pr<strong>of</strong>essor <strong>of</strong> English and Writing at Ithaca College<br />

and Tammy is the owner and chef <strong>of</strong> a local Patisserie.<br />

27. Defendant City <strong>of</strong> Ithaca (hereafter referred to as “the City”) is a municipal corporation with<br />

<strong>of</strong>fices at City Hall, 108 East Green Street, Ithaca, <strong>New</strong> <strong>York</strong> 14850.<br />

28. Defendant Julie Holcomb (hereafter referred to as “the City Clerk”) is the City Clerk <strong>of</strong> the City <strong>of</strong><br />

mg\litigat\SameSex.com<br />

- Page 4 -


Ithaca, County <strong>of</strong> Tompkins, <strong>State</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>New</strong> <strong>York</strong>. The City Clerk is responsible for receiving and<br />

acting upon marriage license applications on behalf <strong>of</strong> the City <strong>of</strong> Ithaca.<br />

29. The City Clerk received applications for marriage licenses from the plaintiffs and refused to issue<br />

such licenses.<br />

30. Defendant <strong>New</strong> <strong>York</strong> <strong>State</strong> Department <strong>of</strong> Health (hereafter “DOH”) is charged with<br />

administering the law governing marriage in the <strong>State</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>New</strong> <strong>York</strong>. DOH directed <strong>cit</strong>y and town<br />

clerks in <strong>New</strong> <strong>York</strong> <strong>State</strong> not to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples seeking to marry.<br />

mg\litigat\SameSex.com<br />

VENUE AND JURISDICTION<br />

31. The Court has jurisdiction pursuant to CPLR §301.<br />

32. Venue is proper in Tompkins County pursuant to CPLR §504 because defendants include the City<br />

<strong>of</strong> Ithaca, which is situated in Tompkins County.<br />

PRELIMINARY STATEMENT<br />

33. This action arises out <strong>of</strong> the City <strong>of</strong> Ithaca’s City Clerk’s unconstitutional refusal, under<br />

instructions from the <strong>New</strong> <strong>York</strong> <strong>State</strong> Department <strong>of</strong> Health, to issue marriage licenses to the<br />

plaintiffs solely because each plaintiff is gay or lesbian and seeks to marry an individual <strong>of</strong> the<br />

same sex.<br />

34. The Plaintiffs in this action are committed couples who intend to spend their lives together and<br />

who want to assume the responsibilities <strong>of</strong> marriage and to avail themselves <strong>of</strong> the myriad <strong>of</strong><br />

benefits conferred by the marital contract.<br />

35. The right to marry is one <strong>of</strong> the deeply personal privacy interests protected by the due process<br />

clause <strong>of</strong> the <strong>New</strong> <strong>York</strong> <strong>State</strong> Constitution, Art. I, Section 6. The exclusion <strong>of</strong> Plaintiffs and other<br />

same-sex couples from legal marriage violates this fundamental right.<br />

36. The right to equal protection <strong>of</strong> the laws under the <strong>New</strong> <strong>York</strong> <strong>State</strong> Constitution, Art. I, Section<br />

11, also prohibits the <strong>State</strong>’s discriminatory marriage scheme, which, by drawing impermissible<br />

- Page 5 -


distinctions based on gender and sexual orientation, leaves all same-sex couples without access to<br />

this extraordinarily significant legal institution.<br />

37. Plaintiffs seek a declaration that <strong>New</strong> <strong>York</strong>’s Domestic Relations Law is unconstitutional ins<strong>of</strong>ar<br />

as it denies the right to marry to same-sex couples and an injunction requiring Defendants to grant<br />

them marriage licenses and access to civil marriage on the same terms and conditions available to<br />

different-sex couples.<br />

38. Except for the fact that they are <strong>of</strong> the same sex, plaintiffs are legally qualified to marry under the<br />

laws <strong>of</strong> <strong>New</strong> <strong>York</strong>.<br />

39. During the winter and spring <strong>of</strong> 2004, each plaintiff couple identified hereinabove appeared in<br />

person and applied for a marriage license by completing an application at the Office <strong>of</strong> the City<br />

Clerk <strong>of</strong> the City <strong>of</strong> Ithaca.<br />

40. After completing the marriage application and filing it with the City Clerk <strong>of</strong> the City <strong>of</strong> Ithaca,<br />

each plaintiff couple was notified by the City <strong>of</strong> Ithaca as follows:<br />

“The <strong>New</strong> <strong>York</strong> <strong>State</strong> Department <strong>of</strong> Health has advised that the issuance <strong>of</strong> a marriage<br />

license to same-sex couples violates <strong>New</strong> <strong>York</strong> Law and would subject any municipal<br />

clerk who issues such a license to criminal prosecution and penalties.<br />

Accordingly, I am constrained to reject your recent application for a marriage license.”<br />

41. The aforementioned letter <strong>of</strong> rejection was signed by the defendant Julie Conley Holcomb as the<br />

City Clerk and by Martin A. Luster as the City Attorney for the City <strong>of</strong> Ithaca.<br />

42. The plaintiff couples bringing this action continue in their desire to be married in the <strong>State</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>New</strong><br />

<strong>York</strong> to participate fully in an institution that plays a central role in our society.<br />

43. By denying Plaintiffs access to marriage, <strong>New</strong> <strong>York</strong> <strong>State</strong> law forbids them from making the legal<br />

commitment to one another that marriage entails and deprives them <strong>of</strong> the comprehensive legal<br />

structure for couples that marriage provides.<br />

44. Plaintiffs are harmed by their exclusion from a broad array <strong>of</strong> statutory protections, benefits, and<br />

mg\litigat\SameSex.com<br />

- Page 6 -


mutual responsibilities afforded by <strong>New</strong> <strong>York</strong>’s marriage law. In addition, because many private<br />

parties rely on the <strong>State</strong>’s conferral <strong>of</strong> marriage and the definition <strong>of</strong> a “spouse,” plaintiffs suffer<br />

deprivation <strong>of</strong> certain privately conferred benefits and protections, and from lack <strong>of</strong> appropriate<br />

recognition and respect for their relationship in their neighborhood, workplace and in other areas<br />

<strong>of</strong> their everyday lives.<br />

mg\litigat\SameSex.com<br />

FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION<br />

45. Plaintiffs reallege and incorporate by reference each and every allegation contained in the<br />

preceding paragraphs as if set forth fully herein.<br />

46. Article I, section 6 <strong>of</strong> <strong>New</strong> <strong>York</strong> <strong>State</strong>’s Constitution provides that “no person shall be deprived <strong>of</strong><br />

life, liberty, or property without due process <strong>of</strong> law.” Among the personal interests protected by<br />

the <strong>New</strong> <strong>York</strong> <strong>State</strong> Constitution’s due process clause is the right to privacy, which includes one’s<br />

ability to make intimate choices <strong>of</strong> a deeply personal nature, including whom to marry.<br />

47. The <strong>State</strong>’s statutory framework for marriage precludes two individuals <strong>of</strong> the same sex from<br />

exercising the right to marry each other, interfering with a core personal choice.<br />

48. The <strong>State</strong>’s statutory framework for marriage, ins<strong>of</strong>ar as it bars Plaintiffs from marriage because<br />

they wish to marry a partner <strong>of</strong> the same sex, violates the <strong>State</strong> constitutional right <strong>of</strong> due process.<br />

AS AND FOR A SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION<br />

49. Plaintiffs reallege and incorporate by reference each and every allegation contained in paragraphs<br />

one through forty-nine as if set forth fully herein.<br />

50. The <strong>State</strong>’s statutory framework for marriage discriminates against individuals in same-sex<br />

relationships because they wish to marry a life partner <strong>of</strong> the same sex, allowing access to<br />

marriage only for different-sex couples.<br />

51. The <strong>State</strong>’s statutory framework for marriage, ins<strong>of</strong>ar as it discriminates against Plaintiffs and the<br />

other same-sex couples by drawing impermissible distinctions based on gender and sexual<br />

- Page 7 -


orientation, violates the equal protection clause <strong>of</strong> the <strong>New</strong> <strong>York</strong> <strong>State</strong> Constitution, Art. 1 section<br />

11.<br />

WHEREFORE, plaintiffs respectfully request that the Court grant the following relief:<br />

A) Declare, based on the rights to privacy and equal protection under the <strong>New</strong> <strong>York</strong> <strong>State</strong><br />

Constitution, the Plaintiffs’ rights to marry and to equality have been violated, and that they are<br />

constitutionally entitled to treatment by Defendants equal to the treatment <strong>of</strong> different-sex couples<br />

regarding access to marriage and to the rights that flow from marriage.<br />

B) Direct Defendants to grant marriage licenses to Plaintiffs and otherwise to infringe no longer upon<br />

Plaintiffs’ right to marry, and to treat Plaintiffs no differently than different-sex couples regarding<br />

access to marriage.<br />

C) Grant Plaintiffs such further relief as the Court deems just and proper.<br />

Dated: May ______, 2004 ____________________________________<br />

Bixler & Stumbar, LLP<br />

Attorneys for Plaintiffs XYZ<br />

207 East Court Street<br />

Ithaca, <strong>New</strong> <strong>York</strong> 14850<br />

Tel. (607) 273-6300<br />

mg\litigat\SameSex.com<br />

_____________________________________<br />

Mariette Geldenhuys, Attorney at Law<br />

Attorney for Plaintiffs ABC<br />

The Gateway Center<br />

401 East <strong>State</strong> Street, Suite 306<br />

Ithaca, <strong>New</strong> <strong>York</strong> 14850<br />

Tel. (607) 273-2272<br />

- Page 8 -

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!