Braschi v. Stahl Associates Co. – Gay Rights
Braschi v. Stahl Associates Co., 74 N.Y.2d 201, 544 N.Y.S.2d 784, 543 N.E.2d 49 (N.Y. 1989).
NATURE OF THE CASE: This family law case involved a dispute over a rent-controlled apartment.
FACTS: Braschi (P) and Leslie Blanchard were homosexual life partners living together in a rent-controlled apartment for which Blanchard was the tenant of record. Blanchard died in September 1986 and in November 1986 Stahl (D) served notice for Braschi to vacate the apartment. Stahl alleged that Braschi and Blanchard were not a family and that therefore under the rent control provisions Braschi was a mere licensee and was not entitled to remain in the rent controlled apartment. The issue at trial was the definition of the word “family” in the rent control provisions. Braschi was evicted and appealed.
ISSUE: Does the term “family” in the rent control provisions include homosexual life partners?
RULE OF LAW: Yes. The term “family” in the rent control provisions includes same sex life partners.
HOLDING AND DECISION: A family includes two adult lifetime partners whose relationship is long term and characterized by an emotional and financial commitment and interdependence. A family defined by Webster’s Dictionary is a group of people united by certain convictions of common affiliation.
Braschi should be afforded the opportunity to prove that he and Blanchard were a family. The lower court should look to the exclusivity and longevity of the relationship, the level of emotional and financial commitment, the manner in which the parties conducted their everyday lives and held themselves out to society, and the reliance placed upon on each other for daily family services.
Braschi and Blanchard lived together and held themselves out as spouses. The tenants were known to the building superintendent and doorman who both viewed the two men as a couple. These two shared joint checking and savings accounts, held three safe deposit boxes jointly, and rent was often paid from the joint account. Blanchard executed a power of attorney so that Braschi could make necessary financial, medical, and personal decisions for him during his illness and named Braschi the beneficiary of his life insurance policy as well as primary legatee and coexecutor of his estate. A court could reasonably conclude that these men were more than mere roommates.
DISPOSITION: Reversed and remanded.
DISSENT: The majority has extended the definition of family to include anyone with an emotional and financial commitment. The regulation’s intent can only be applied by a definition of family to include objectively verifiable relationships based on blood, marriage and adoption as the State has historically done in estate succession laws, family court acts, and similar legislation.