H.M. V E.T. NYCLA Amicus Brief Publications1319_0

Rockland County Family Court Clerk’s Index No. U-110-07

Court of Appeals

STATE OF NEW YORK

H.M. (Anonymous),

Petitioner-Appellant,

—against—

E.T. (Anonymous),

Respondent-Respondent.

BRIEF OF AMICUS CURIAE

NEW YORK COUNTY LAWYERS’ASSOCIATION

Matthew L. Craner

Counsel of Record

Lisa M. Cirando

Scott Roehm

Michelle Rutherford, Law Clerk

Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP

666 Fifth Avenue

New York, New York 10103

Telephone: (212) 506-5000

Facsimile: (212) 506-5151

Attorneys for Amicus Curiae

New York County Lawyers’ Association

December 24, 2009

COURT OF APPEALS

STATE OF NEW YORK

Motion by: The New York County Lawyers’ Association

Date, Time and January 4, 2010, 9:30 a.m., or as soon as counsel can be heard, at the

Place of Motion: Court of Appeals, 20 Eagle Street, Albany, New York, 12207-1095

Supporting Papers: Affirmation of Matthew L. Craner, dated December 24, 2009; and the proposed Brief submitted therewith

Relief Requested: An order, issued pursuant to Court of Appeals Rule 500.23, permitting the New York County Lawyers’ Association to participate in this matter as an amicus curiae and to file the proposed Brief

Dated: New York, NY

December 24, 2009

Respectfully submitted,

__________________________________________

Matthew L. Craner

Counsel of Record

Lisa M. Cirando

Scott Roehm

Michelle Rutherford, Law Clerk

ORRICK, HERRINGTON & SUTCLIFFE LLP

666 Fifth Avenue

New York, NY 10103

(212) 506-5000

Attorneys for the New York County Lawyers’ Association

COURT OF APPEALS

STATE OF NEW YORK

MATTHEW L. CRANER, an attorney duly admitted to practice before the Courts of the state of New York, affirms the following under penalty of perjury:

1. I am a partner in the firm of Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP, counsel to the New York County Lawyers’ Association (“NYCLA”). I submit this Affirmation in support of NYCLA’s Motion for Leave to File Brief as Amicus Curiae in the above-captioned matter.

2. NYCLA is a not-for-profit membership organization of approximately 10,000 attorneys practicing primarily in New York County, founded and operating specifically for charitable and educational purposes. NYCLA’s certificate of incorporation specifically provides that it is to do what it deems in the public interest and for the public good, and to seek reform in the law.

3. Founded in 1908, NYCLA was the first major bar association in the country that admitted members without regard to race, ethnicity, religion or gender and has since played a leading role in the fight against discrimination both in the profession and under local, state and federal law. NYCLA’s bedrock principles have been the inclusion of all who wish to join and the active pursuit of legal system reform.

4. Consistent with its founding and sustaining principles of non-discrimination and inclusion, NYCLA has repeatedly appeared as amicus curiae in cases before this Court to endorse rights for same-sex couples. Indeed, NYCLA has a significant interest in seeing that all families in New York, including families of same-sex couples and non-traditional families formed by non-biological, non-adoptive parents, enjoy the same rights and protections under the law.

5. Two of NYCLA’s Committees have considerable expertise with the issues involved in the instant appeal: The Family Court and Child Welfare Committee, which concerns itself with legislation and substantive law, the conduct of the judiciary, and general matters regarding the Family Court; and the Lesbian / Gay / Bisexual / Transgender Issues Committee, which focuses on issues relating to lesbians, gays, bisexuals and transgender persons in the legal profession and in society.

6. NYCLA is familiar with the questions involved in this appeal and seeks to file its amicus curiae Brief in order to assist the Court in its consideration. Because of its founding principles, long history of advocacy around same-sex equality, and Committee expertise, NYCLA believes it could identify law or arguments that might otherwise escape the Court’s consideration and that its Brief would otherwise be of assistance to the Court, as set forth in Court of Appeals Rule 500.23(a)(4).

December 24, 2009 

_____________________________________

MATTHEW L. CRANER

View Original PDF