(a) Where a minor child is residing within this state, either parent may apply to the supreme court for a writ of habeas corpus to have such minor child brought before such court; and on the return thereof, the court, on due consideration, may award the natural guardianship, charge and custody of such child to either parent for such time, under such regulations and restrictions, and with such provisions and directions, as the case may require, and may at any time thereafter vacate or modify such order. In all cases there shall be no prima facie right to the custody of the child in either parent, but the court shall determine solely what is for the best interest of the child, and what will best promote its welfare and happiness, and make award accordingly.
(b) Any order under this section which applies to rights of visitation with a child remanded or placed in the care of a person, official, agency or institution pursuant to article ten of the family court act or pursuant to an instrument approved under section three hundred fifty-eight-a of the social services law, shall be enforceable pursuant to the provisions of part eight of article ten of such act, sections three hundred fifty-eight-a and three hundred eighty-four-a of the social services law and other applicable provisions of law against any person or official having care and custody, or temporary care and custody, of such child.
“Matter of Brooke S.B. v. Elizabeth A.C.C.” is a landmark case decided by the Court of Appeals of New York on August 30, 2016. This case addressed the legal recognition of same-sex couples in matters of child custody and parental rights.
In this case, Brooke S.B. and Elizabeth A.C.C. were a same-sex couple who had been in a committed relationship and raised a child together. Although they were not legally married, they had jointly planned for and raised the child during their relationship. However, when their relationship ended, Elizabeth A.C.C. sought sole custody of the child, asserting that she was the child’s biological and adoptive parent.
The central issue in the case was whether Brooke S.B., who was not the child’s biological or adoptive parent, could seek custody and visitation rights. The Court of Appeals of New York ruled in favor of Brooke S.B., establishing a new legal standard that recognized “de facto” parents, regardless of biological or adoptive ties, when it is shown that they have established a meaningful parental relationship with a child.
This decision marked a significant legal milestone, extending parental rights to non-biological and non-adoptive parents in same-sex relationships. It recognized the importance of nurturing relationships in the best interests of the child, regardless of the gender or marital status of the parents. This case had far-reaching implications for family law and LGBTQ+ rights in New York and set a precedent for similar cases across the United States.