Contract in Same-Sex Couple's Split Controls, Superior Court Rules
The contract signed between a same-sex couple in 2003 applies to the distribution of their shared home upon their breakup, the state Superior Court has ruled, finding the reason one woman moved out was irrelevant.
January 30, 2015 at 08:08 PM
5 minute read
The contract signed between a same-sex couple in 2003 applies to the distribution of their shared home upon their breakup, the state Superior Court has ruled, finding the reason one woman moved out was irrelevant.
Cynthia Clifton and Joanne Bruscemi were in a relationship and began living together in an apartment in 1993. Two years later, they moved to a single-family home that Clifton bought in her name. In 2003, Clifton signed a deed transferring ownership to Bruscemi as a joint tenant. The parties signed an agreement that, if their relationship ended, Bruscemi, upon leaving the residence, would transfer back the property rights and be paid by Clifton 50 percent of the property's assessed value less Clifton's $60,000 initial investment into the property, according to the opinion.
Clifton and Bruscemi broke up in 2012 and Clifton filed a suit to enforce the agreement. In December 2012, the Allegheny County Court of Common Pleas directed Bruscemi to transfer her interest in the home with no payment due from Clifton. The court also directed Clifton to satisfy a mortgage both parties had signed and to pay all of the expenses of the transfer of Bruscemi's interest in the property. Both Clifton and Bruscemi appealed.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllPa. Federal District Courts Reach Full Complement Following Latest Confirmation
The Defense Bar Is Feeling the Strain: Busy Med Mal Trial Schedules Might Be Phila.'s 'New Normal'
7 minute readFederal Judge Allows Elderly Woman's Consumer Protection Suit to Proceed Against Citizens Bank
5 minute readJudge Leaves Statute of Limitations Question in Injury Crash Suit for a Jury
4 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Federal Laws Also Preempt State's Swipe Fee Law on Out-of-State Banks, Judge Rules
- 2Judge Grills DOJ on Trump’s Birthright Citizenship Executive Order
- 3Exceptional Growth Becoming the Rule? Demand and Rate Hikes Drove Strong Year for Big Law
- 4Dentons Taps D.C. Capital Markets Attorney for New US Managing Partner
- 5Auto Dealers Ask Court to Pump the Brakes on Scout Motors’ Florida Sales
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.