Case Name: Sandra Cote-Whitacre & others vs. Department of Public Health & others (and a companion case)
Court: Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Jurisdiction: Massachusetts
Decision Date: 2006-03-30
Citations: 446 Mass. 350
Docket Number: 
Parties: Sandra Cote-Whitacre & others vs. Department of Public Health & others (and a companion case ).
Judges: 
Reporter: Massachusetts Reports
Volume: 446
Pages: 350–412

Head Matter:
Sandra Cote-Whitacre & others vs. Department of Public Health & others (and a companion case ).
Suffolk.
October 6, 2005.
March 30, 2006.
Present: Marshall, C.J., Greaney, Ireland, Spina, Cowin, Sosman, & Cordy, JJ.
Michele E. Granda (Gary D. Buseck with her) for the plaintiffs.
Kevin D. Bait (Anne Robbins & Sarah R. Wunsch with him) for town clerk of Provincetown & others.
Peter Sacks, Assistant Attorney General, for Department of Public Health & others.
The following submitted briefs for amici curiae:
Kenneth J. Parsigian & Shirley Sperling Paley for Erwin Chemerinsky & others.
Kathleen M. O’Donnell, Mark D. Mason, Martin W. Healy, Peter F. Zupcofska, Elizabeth M. Duffy, Darien K.S. Fleming, Eleanor H. Gilbane, Shu-Yi Oei, Matthew D. Schnall, & Corin R. Swift for Massachusetts Bar Association & another.
Anthony Mirenda, Vickie L. Henry, Sara K. Piláis, & Bradley E. Abruzzi for Asian American Legal Defense and Education Fund & others.
Barbara J. Cox, of California, & Jonathan A. Shapiro, Maura T. Healey, Joseph J. Mueller, Steven P. Lehotsky, & Miranda Hooker for Barbara J. Cox & others.
George 1. Goverman, pro se.
Benjamin W. Bull, Glen Lavy, Randall Wenger, & Dale Schowengerdt, of Arizona, & Philip D. Moran for Raymond Flynn & another.
Roberta Cote-Whitacre; Amy Zimmerman and Tanya Wexler; Mark Pears-all and Paul Trubey; Katrina and Kristin Gossman; Judith and Lee McNeilBeckwith; Wendy Becker and Mary Norton; Michael Thome and James Theberge; and Edward Butler and Leslie Schoof.
Commissioner of Public Health, registry of vital records and statistics, and registrar of vital records and statistics.
Town clerk of Provincetown & others ví. Attorney General & others.

Opinion:
By the Court.
The orders denying the plaintiffs' motions for preliminary injunction in these cases are affirmed. A majority of the Justices also agree that, as to the plaintiffs who reside in Connecticut, Maine, New Hampshire, and Vermont, a judgment for the defendants shall enter in the Superior Court because same-sex marriage is prohibited in those States. As to the New York and Rhode Island plaintiffs, their cases shall proceed in the Superior Court, on an expedited basis, for a determination whether same-sex marriage is prohibited in those States.
So ordered.