FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

March 28, 2001

Appeals Court Decides Cases of Domestic Violence Involving Gay Men

The Massachusetts Appeals Court has decided its first known cases involving domestic violence between gay men.  It ruled that a judge may not issue “mutual restraining orders” unless the judge makes written findings that the orders are warranted against both parties.  While this case involved gay men, the Appeals Court’s decision applies to all cases of domestic violence.

According to Mary Bonauto, a lawyer with Gay & Lesbian Advocates & Defenders who represented a wide variety of abuse prevention and domestic violence groups, “Mutual restraining orders are a hot topic, including in the gay community.  This ruling is a positive step because mutual orders undermine the duty of the courts to discover who is the real victim of abuse and protect that person.”

The case involves a Mr. Ayer who lived for a time with a male couple.  According to Mr. Ayer, a pattern of abuse culminating in an argument on December 26, 1998 caused him to leave the home and obtain restraining orders against the couple.  Three days later, the couple went to another court and obtained orders against Mr. Ayer.  The judge ruled there was “abuse amongst all the parties here, and there will be mutual restraining orders.”  The judge never issued written findings.  The Appeals Court lifted these orders against Mr. Ayer.

Recognizing the teaching function of appellate opinions, GLAD’s amici curiae brief also addressed factors to consider in cases involving alleged domestic violence involving gay, lesbian and bisexual people.  The Appeals Court did not reach these issues in its opinion.  According to Vickie Henry, one of Mr. Ayer’s attorneys at the firm of Foley, Hoag & Eliot LLP (FHE), “This decision is a tremendous victory for victims of domestic violence.  In some ways, the ruling is a lost opportunity because the Court could have given guidance to lower courts on some of the particular dynamics which might be involved in same-sex domestic violence cases.”  Anthony Miranda, also of FHE, added, “The GLAD brief explained how homophobia can be a weapon of abusers and the myth that just because everyone is of the same-sex, they all have the same power.  Trial judges need to be aware of this because these cases occur regularly.”

GLAD’s Amici Curiae brief was joined by Jane Doe, Inc., Massachusetts Law Reform Institute, Domestic Violence Council, Gay Men’s Domestic Violence Project, Network for Battered Lesbians and Bisexual Women,  Massachusetts Lesbian and Gay Bar Association and Fenway Community Health Center.

GLAD is New England’s leading legal rights organization dedicated to ending discrimination based on sexual orientation, HIV status, and gender identity and expression through the courts and public education.

Richard Sommi v. Samuel Ayer, Samuel Keller v. Samuel Ayer
Mass. Appeals Court, No. 99-P-432