NYC judge rules polyamorous liaison qualified for same legal protections as 2-person relationships

The eviction court in New York City has ruled in favor of polyamorous unions. Judge Karen May Bacdayan of the New York Civil Court reportedly came to the conclusion that polyamorous partnerships are entitled to the same level of legal protection as two-person relationships in the case of West 49th St., LLC v. O'Neill. Three people were engaged in the case West 49th St., LLC v. O'Neill: Scott Anderson, Markyus O'Neill, and Anderson's husband Robert Romano, who all lived elsewhere. The building's owner claimed that O'Neill had no right to renew the lease since he was a "non-traditional family member" after Anderson passed away while the agreement was still in effect. O'Neill's affidavit, in which he describes himself as a non-traditional family member, was described by the property owner's attorney as a "fairytale." The matter will be brought back before the court following a closer examination of the relationships between the three people, according to LGBTQ Nation. Judge Bacdayan stated that the existence of a trio, regardless of how well they got along, should not automatically reject O'Neill's claim to non-eviction protections in her ruling. She also emphasized the significance of a prior case. “Before gay marriage was legalized in any state, Braschi v. Stahl Assocs. Co., 74 NY2d 201 (1989) was decided. The New York State Court of Appeals became the first American appellate court to recognize that a non-traditional, two-person, same-sex, committed family-like relationship is entitled to legal recognition, and that the nontraditional family member is entitled to receive noneviction protections. The Braschi court interpreted the Rent Control Law in effect at a time when there was no legal recognition of same-sex marriage, and broadly construed the law to effectuate its remedial purposes. Braschi is widely regarded as a catalyst for the legal challenges and changes that ensued,” she pointed out. “By the end of 2014, gay marriage was legal in 35 states through either legislation or state court action. Obergefell, et al. v. Hodges et al., 576 U.S. 644, 135 S. Ct. 2584 (2015), the seminal U.S. Supreme Court decision that established same-sex marriage as a constitutional right, was also heralded as groundbreaking. However, Braschi and its progeny and Obergefell limit their holdings to two-person relationships. The instant case presents the distinct and complex issue of significant multi-person relationships.” Bacdayan points out how developments after 1989, such as modifications to the definition of "family," have an impact on the current situation. She points out that the legal recognition that a kid could have more than two legal parents has advanced quickly. “Why then, except for the very real possibility of implicit majoritarian animus, is the limitation of two persons inserted into the definition of a family-like relationship for the purposes of receiving the same protections from eviction accorded to legally formalized or blood relationships?” asked Bacdayan. “Why does a person have to be committed to one other person in only certain prescribed ways in order to enjoy stability in housing after the departure of a loved one?” she continued. “Do all nontraditional relationships have to comprise or include only two primary persons?”