Romero V. Brown

Case #: 2:14-cv-00325-JVB-PRC
Court Level: Federal District Court
Date Filed: 8 September 2014
Date of Appeal:

Description:

• A terminally ill Indiana woman and her wife filed suit seeking state recognition of their Illinois marriage.
• 10 September 2014, the parties involved filed a Joint Stipulation stating the the defendants "will not enforce Indiana Code § 31-11-1-1(b) against Plaintiffs and will recognize their out-of-state marriage" and otherwise staying the case until SCOTUS resolves the Indiana cert petition.
• 11 September 2014, an opinion and order were issued adopting the Joint Resolution.

Baskin v. Bogan (Rae Baskin & Esther Fuller, et al. v. Bogan, et al.)

Case #: 14-277 (SCOTUS); 14-2386 (7th Circuit Court of Appeals), 1:14−cv−00355 (District Court)
Court Level: 7th Circuit Court of Appeals
Date Filed: 10 March 2014
Date of Appeal: 25 June 2014

Description:

• Lambda Legal filed a federal suit for 3 couples challenging the IN same-gender civil marriage ban, and especially end-of-life health care.
• 22 April 2014, opposition was filed and argument was held 2 May 2014.
• 8 May 2014 Chief Judge Richard Young granted a Temporary Restraining Order (TRO) requiring the state of Indiana to recognize the marriage of Amy Sandler and Niki Quasney, who are preparing their family for the end of Quasney’s epic fight with ovarian cancer, and ordering the state to issue an accurate death certificate recognizing their marriage in the event Quasney died before the case could be decided.
• 8 May 2014, the judge approved a preliminary injunction re: the same. The state immediately filed an appeal to the injunction and requested a stay pending the appeal.
• 12 May 2014 Quasney and Sandler filed their opposition to the stay pending an appeal.
• 25 June 2014, "For the reasons set forth below, the court finds that Indiana’s same sex marriage ban violates the due process clause and equal protection clause and is, therefore, unconstitutional."
• The state immediately filed notice of appeal and an emergency motion for a stay of the ruling pending appeal.
• 27 June 2014, the stay was granted.
• 30 June 2014, the plaintiffs filed an emergency motion to lift the 7th Circuit's stay for terminally ill Nikole Quasney and her family.
• 1 July 2014, the 7th Circuit ordered Indiana to recognize the marriage of Lambda Legal clients Amy Sandler and Nikole Quasney on an emergency basis "until further order of this court."
• 9 July 2014, Mark Ahearn, General Counsel to Indiana Governor Mike Pence, issued a Directive instructing state agencies to deny recognition of all marriages of same-sex couples except that of Amy Sandler and Nikole Quasney. "Indiana Code § 31-11-1-1 is in full force and effect and executive branch agencies are to execute their functions as though the U.S. District Court Order of June 25, 2014 had not been issued. Also in compliance with the rule of law, the State will comply with the Court of Appeal's individual order recognizing the marriage of Amy Sandler and Nikole Quasney."
• 11 July 2014, the State Defendants filed a Petition for an Initial Hearing en banc.
• 14 July 2014, the 7^th Circuit set argument for 13 August 2014.
• 16 July 2014, the 7^th Circuit canceled argument for 13 August 2014. No reason given.
•  23 July 2014, the attorneys general of 10 states have joined in Indiana's appeal of a federal judge's ruling that found the state law banning same-sex marriage unconstitutional. The attorneys general of Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Colorado, Idaho, Louisiana, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota and Utah filed a friend of the court brief alleging it is not the judicial branch's role to determine whether same-sex marriage should be permitted.
• On 25 July 2014, the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals rescheduled oral arguments in Indiana’s landmark marriage cases — which have now been consolidated with Wisconsin’s — for 26 August 2014. The 7th Circuit also denied the states' requests for initial hearing en banc. The cases will be heard first by a 3-judge panel.
• 5 August 2014, BALIF Coaltion, including MEUSA, submitted Amicus Brief. 
• 26 August 2014, very lively oral arguments were heard by 7th Circuit in Chicago; access audio.
• 4 September 2014, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit issued a unanimous decision affirming the lower court decisions overturning the Indiana and Wisconsin bans on marriage equality. 
• 9 September 2014, Indiana filed a Petition For Writ Of Certiorari with the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) asking that it review the 7th Circuit decision.  
• 9 September 2014, the plaintiffs in all three of the consolidated Indiana cases responded to the Petition For Writ Of Certiorari, agreeing that SCOTUS should take the case. 
• 10 September 2014, the state asked for a stay pending final disposition of their appeal SCOTUS. 
• 11 September 2014, the plaintiffs filed their Opposition to Stay Pending Appeal.
• 15 September 2014, the 7th Circuit granted the stay. "The stay will terminate automatically if the certiorari petition is denied or will terminate upon the judgment of the Supreme Court if the certiorari petition is granted."
• 6 October 2014, SCOTUS declined to take any of the 7 marriage equality cases from 5 states on appeal, including this one. See page 40 of the order. The 7th Circuit's September 4th ruling stands.
• 8 February 2015, Indiana Woman Who Fought Marriage Ban Dies of Cancer - AP via ABC News
• Attorney Fees Settlements - Kirkland & Ellis ($325,000) and Lambda Legal ($325,00)

Fujii v. Dept. of Revenue (formerly Fujii v. Governor, State of Indiana)

Case #: 14-2387 (7th Circuit Court of Appeals);1:14-cv-00404-TWP-DKL (District Court)
Court Level: 7th Circuit Court of Appeals
Date Filed: 14 March 2014
Date of Appeal: 25 June 2014

Description:

• The American Civil Liberties Union, the ACLU of Indiana, and the Lemieux Law Office of Indianapolis filed a federal lawsuit yesterday on behalf of fifteen individuals, including a widow and two children, who have experienced harm and discrimination because of Indiana’s ban on marriage between same-sex couples and its ban on recognition of legal marriages between same-sex couples performed in other jurisdictions.
• Assigned to same judge hearing Love v. Pence.
• 3 April 2014, plaintiffs filed a motion for preliminary injunction and to advance trial to date of preliminary injunction hearing.
• 3 June 2014, answer to amended complaint filed by Defendants.
• 25 June 2014, in Baskin v. Bogan, "For the reasons set forth below, the court finds that Indiana’s same sex marriage ban violates the due process clause and equal protection clause and is, therefore, unconstitutional."
• The state immediately filed notice of appeal and an emergency motion for a stay of the ruling pending appeal.
• 27 June 2014, the stay was granted.
• 14 July 2014, the 7^th Circuit set argument for 13 August 2014.
• 16 July 2014, the 7^th Circuit canceled argument for 13 August 2014. No reason given.
• On 25 July 2014, the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals rescheduled oral arguments in Indiana’s landmark marriage cases — which have now been consolidated with Wisconsin’s — for 26 August 2014. The 7th Circuit also denied the states' requests for initial hearing en banc. The cases will be heard first by a 3-judge panel.
• Going forward, refer to Baskin v. Bogan above.
• Attorney Fees Settlements - ACLU of Indiana ($149,933.24); ACLU LGBT & AIDS Project ($34,971.39); and Sean Lemieux ($11,625) 

Lee v. Abbot (formerly Pamela Lee & Candace Batten-Lee, et al. v. IN Governor Michael Pence, et al.)

Case #: 14-2388(7^th Circuit Court of Appeals);1:14-cv-0406-JMS-DKL (District Court)
Court Level: 7th Circuit Court of Appeals
Date Filed: 14 March 2014
Date of Appeal: 25 June 2014

Description:

• Federal lawsuit filed on behalf of 4 lesbian couples (and the children of one couple) married in other states, where one member of each couple is either a local law enforcement officer or a retired fire department officer.
• Assigned to same judge hearing Love v. Pence.
• 21 April 2014, plaintiffs filed a motion for summary judgment and motion for preliminary injunction.
• 15 May 2014, defendants filed memorandum in support of their motion for summary judgment and in opposition to plaintiffs’ preliminary injunction and motion for summary judgment.
• 16 May 2014, defendants filed their answer to the complaint.
• 5 June 2014, plaintiffs filed their motion for summary judgment and preliminary injunction, combined with their response to Defendant’s motion for summary judgment.
• 25 June 2014, in Baskin v. Bogan, "For the reasons set forth below, the court finds that Indiana’s same sex marriage ban violates the due process clause and equal protection clause and is, therefore, unconstitutional."
• The state immediately filed notice of appeal and an emergency motion for a stay of the ruling pending appeal.
• 27 June 2014, the stay was granted.
• 1 July 2014, the plaintiffs filed a motion to lift the stay as to administration of pension benefits.
• 2 July 2014, the 7^th Circuit denied the motion.
• 14 July 2014, the 7^th Circuit set argument for 13 August 2014.
• 16 July 2014, the 7^th Circuit canceled argument for 13 August 2014. No reason given.
• On 25 July 2014, the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals rescheduled oral arguments in Indiana’s landmark marriage cases — which have now been consolidated with Wisconsin’s — for 26 August 2014. The 7th Circuit also denied the states' requests for initial hearing en banc. The cases will be heard first by a 3-judge panel.
• Going forward, refer to Baskin v. Bogan above.
• Attorney Fees Settlements - Karen Celestino-Horseman ($111,153.75); Fillenwarth Dennerline Groth & Towe ($95,345); Robert Katz ($39,000); Mark W. Sniderman ($38,821.50); Kelly R. Eskew ($27,592.50); and Sweeney Hayes LLC ($24,428.50).

In Re the marriage of Melanie Davis & Angela Summers

Case #: 53A01-1305-DR-221
Date Filed: 25 October 2012
Ruling Date: 20 December 2013

Description:

• Melanie Davis filed a petition to dissolve her marriage with Angela Summers in 2012.
• The two were married in 1999 when Davis was living as David Paul Summers, and they have one child. In 2005, Davis petitioned the Marion Circuit Court to change her name and birth certificate to recognize that she is female.
• The trial court originally approved of the provisional order for dissolution, but then on 8 March 2013 sua sponte issued an order that the marriage became void when Davis’ birth certificate was changed to female based on I.C. 31-11-1-1. That statute prohibits same-sex marriage. The trial court dismissed the petition for dissolution.

A.C v. N.J.

Case #: 20A04-1301-DR-37
Date Filed: January 2012
Ruling Date: 31 October 2013

Description:

• N.J. (the birth mother) and A.C. (the birth mother’s former partner) had a commitment ceremony in 2007 after they had been living together for two years. They also decided to have a child, and N.J. became pregnant through donor insemination and bore the child in April 2008. A.C. was present at the child’s birth. The two women and the child lived together as a family unit for over two years, according to the opinion for the court by Judge Ezra Friedlander, until they terminated their relationship in August 2010, when the child was just over two years old. N.J. allowed A.C. to have frequent visitation with the child for the next nine months, but then cut off visitation. A.C. has not seen the child since October 2011.
• A.C. filed a petition in court in January 2012, seeking custody and visitation. At the subsequent hearing, she made clear she was seeking joint custody, not sole custody, as she did not contend that N.J. was an unfit mother. A.C. relief on the parties’ intent at the time the child was conceived that they would both be parents of the child, and her role as a parent until N.J. cut off contact, arguing that it was in the child’s best interest to continue that relationship. The trial court threw out the case, finding that A.C. was not a legal parent and did not have standing to seek custody or visitation.
• The court of appeals reversed the trial court only on the issue of visitation, and sent the case back “to reconsider Partner’s request for visitation under the standard set forth in our third-party visitation cases.”