BAKER V. VERMONT
744 A.2d 864 (1999)


PROCEDURAL POSTURE: Plaintiff, three same-sex couples, appealed the Chittenden Superior Court's (Vermont) denial of their cross-motion for judgment on the pleadings and the granting of the motion to dismiss filed by defendants, the State of Vermont and towns, in a suit involving defendant town's refusal to grant marriage licenses to plaintiffs.

FACTS: Ps were three same sex couples who lived in committed relationships for periods from 4 to 25 years. They sued because they were denied the same rights as married couples who lived together in committed relationships. They applied for marriage licenses and each was refused a license. The State moved to dismiss their actions on failure to state a claim for which relief can be granted. The trial court granted the motions to dismiss and the motion for judgment on the pleadings. The court ruled that the marriage statutes could not be construed to permit the issuance of licenses to same sex couples. Ps appealed contending that the trial court erred.

ISSUE: Under a state constitution that guarantees that all citizens will be treated equally and not differently, must the state afford some equivalent of marriage and its status to same sex

RULE OF LAW: Under a state constitution that guarantees that all citizens will be treated equally and not differently, the state must afford some equivalent of marriage and its status to same sex couples.

ANALYSIS: Plaintiff, three same-sex couples, were denied marriage licenses from their respective town clerks. Plaintiffs brought suit against defendants to compel the issuance of the licenses. The trial court denied plaintiffs' cross-motion for judgment on the pleadings and granted defendants' motions to dismiss. Plaintiffs appealed. The court reversed the trial court's judgment and ruled that under the Common Benefits Clause of the Vermont Constitution, Vt. Const. art. VII, ch. 1, defendant State was constitutionally required to extend to same-sex couples the common benefits and protections that flowed from marriage under Vermont law. The court stated that it did not rule that plaintiffs were entitled to the marriage licenses, but that they were entitled to the same benefits and protections afforded opposite-sex, married couples. The court retained jurisdiction to give the legislature a reasonable time to remedy the constitutional imbalance.