In Brooke S.B. v. Elizabeth A.C.C., 28 N.Y.3d 1 (2016), a non-biological parent in a same-sex relationship sought custody and visitation after their relationship had ended. Under previous precedent (Alison D. v. Virginia M. (77 NY2d 651 [1991])) only biological or adoptive parents were recognized.
In Catholic Charities of the Diocese of Albany v. Serio, 7 N.Y.3d 510 (2006), a group of religiously affiliated organizations challenged a New York statute that required health insurance plans covering prescription drugs to include contraceptive coverage under the Women’s Health and Wellness Act (NY Insurance Law § 3221(16) and § 4303(cc)).
In Cole v. Cole, 35 N.Y.3d 1012 (2020), the New York Court of Appeals reviewed a mother’s challenge to a custody award favoring the father under Domestic Relations Law § 240(1)(a).
In Elaine W. v. Joint Diseases North General Hospital, 81 N.Y.2d 211 (1993), pregnant women who were denied admission to an inpatient detoxification program challenged the hospital’s categorical exclusion as sex discrimination under New York State's Human Rights Law. The hospital defended its policy on safety grounds, asserting that it lacked obstetrical services and could not treat any pregnant patient.
In the case Hernandez v. Robles, 7 N.Y.3d 338 (2006), 44 same-sex couples challenged New York State’s Domestic Relations Law after being denied marriage licenses. Lower courts upheld the statute, and the New York Court of Appeals affirmed, holding that the legislature could restrict civil marriage to opposite-sex couples. The Court concluded that the statute did not violate state or federal equal protection under the standards applied.
The Court of Appeals, New York’s highest court, removed Romano, a town and village justice, from office, in part, because of his insensitivity to victims of domestic violence. The justice engaged in egregious misconduct in his courtroom, at an arraignment, where a defendant was charged with violating a protection order and assaulting his wife. After reviewing the charges, Romano stated, from the bench, “What’s wrong with that? You’ve got to keep them in line once in a while.” The Court of Appeals concluded that the evidence in the record supported the Commission’s fi
In the case People v. Alonzo, the defendant was charged with several counts of sexual abuse based on multiple groping acts committed against two women during a single, brief encounter. The issue before the Court of Appeals was whether each individual touch could be prosecuted as a separate offense or whether the conduct amounted to one continuous act per victim.
The defendant's wife filed a criminal complaint against him, claiming that he raped her. He moved to dismiss the charge because, under New York Penal Law section 130.35 (“Section 130.35”), which contained a marital exemption, a husband could not be convicted of raping his wife.
In the case People v. Santorelli, 80 N.Y.2d 875 (1992), two women were arrested under NYS Penal Law § 245.01 for publicly exposing the portion of their breasts “below the top of the areola” in a Rochester, New York public park.
