Brooke S.B. v. Elizabeth A.C.C.
New York Court of Appeals
28 N.Y.3d 1 (2016)
- Written by Liz Nakamura, JD
Facts
Brooke S.B. (plaintiff) and Elizabeth A.C.C. (defendant) were a same-sex couple who entered into a preconception agreement to conceive and raise a child together as coparents. Elizabeth conceived the child through artificial insemination. The child was given Brooke’s last name, but Brooke never formally adopted the child. At the time, same-sex marriage was still illegal in New York. Brooke and Elizabeth lived together and shared all parental responsibilities for the first year of the child’s life, after which Brooke and Elizabeth terminated their relationship. After approximately three years of regular visitation between Brooke and the child, Elizabeth barred Brooke from further contact. Brooke filed a family-court petition seeking joint custody and regular visitation. Elizabeth moved to dismiss, arguing that, under Matter of Alison D. v. Virginia M., only biological or adoptive parents had standing to seek visitation or custody of a child. Brooke challenged, arguing that, under the principles of equitable estoppel, her long-term parental relationship with the child gave her sufficient standing. The family court dismissed Brooke’s petition, holding that Alison D. mandated dismissal because Brooke was not a biological or adoptive parent. On appeal, the appellate court affirmed. Brooke appealed to the New York Court of Appeals.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Abdus-Salaam, J.)
Concurrence (Pigott, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 825,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,400 briefs, keyed to 989 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.