RUTGERS COUNCIL OF AAUP CHAPTERS v. RUTGERS


298 N.J. Super. 442 (1997)

RUTGERS COUNCIL OF AAUP CHAPTERS; PROFESSOR WILLIAM E. MAYO; PROFESSOR WILLIAM W. DERBYSHIRE; PROFESSOR LOUIE CREW; PROFESSOR S. SCHURMAN; AND DEAN JAMES D. ANDERSON, PLAINTIFFS-APPELLANTS, v. RUTGERS, THE STATE UNIVERSITY, DEFENDANT, AND DIVISION OF PENSIONS; STATE HEALTH BENEFITS COMMISSION; AND THE DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY, STATE OF NEW JERSEY, DEFENDANTS-RESPONDENTS.

Superior Court of New Jersey, Appellate Division.

Decided March 12, 1997.


Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Denise Reinhardt argued the cause for appellant, Rutgers Counsel of AAUP Chapters (Reinhardt & Schachter, attorneys; Ms. Reinhardt, of counsel, and on the joint brief).

Rosemary DiSavino argued the cause for appellants, William E. Mayo, William W. Derbyshire, and Louie Crew (Ball, Livingston & Tykulsker, attorneys; and on the joint brief).

Julie Goldscheid argued the cause for NOW Legal Defense And Education Fund (on the joint brief).

Lenora Lapidus appeared for American Civil Liberties Union for appellants, S. Schurman and James D. Anderson (Balk, Oxfeld, Mandell & Cohen, attorneys; and on the joint brief).

Sue Kleinberg, Deputy Attorney General, argued the cause for respondents (Peter Verniero, Attorney General of New Jersey, attorney; Mary C. Jacobson, Assistant Attorney General, of counsel; Ms. Kleinberg and Eileen Kelly, Deputy Attorney General, on the brief).

Christine C. Burgess and Suzanne B. Goldberg, attorneys for Amici Curiae Lambda Legal Defense and Education Fund, Inc., and New Jersey Lesbian & Gay Law Association (Ms. Burgess, on the joint brief).

Zazzali, Zazzali, Fagella & Nowak, attorneys for Amicus Curiae New Jersey Education Association (Kathleen A. Naprstek, on the letter-brief).

Before Judges SHEBELL, BAIME and PAUL G. LEVY.


The opinion of the court was delivered by SHEBELL, P.J.A.D.

Plaintiffs, five employees of Rutgers University and their collective bargaining agent, Rutgers Council of AAUP Chapters, appeal the Division of Pensions' denial of health insurance coverage to the employees' same-sex domestic partners. Denial of coverage was based on the failure of the parties to satisfy the statutory definition of "dependents" — that...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases