Opinion ID: 1897530
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Chancery Division

Text: Dale moved for partial summary judgment in September 1993, demanding immediate reinstatement based on his claim that defendants had violated the LAD and New Jersey's public policy. Defendants, in response, cross-moved for summary judgment on all counts. The court denied Dale's motion and granted Boy Scouts' cross-motion. Dale v. Boy Scouts of Am., No. MON-C-330-92 (Ch. Div. Nov. 3, 1995). After concluding that Dale was a sexually active homosexual, the court found that Boy Scouts had always had a policy of excluding active homosexual[s]. Id. at 6, 38. The court opined that homosexual acts are immoral and attributed to Boy Scouts a longstanding antipathy toward such behavior. Id. at 39-40. In the judge's view, [i]t [was] unthinkable ... that the BSA could or would tolerate active homosexuality if discovered in any of its members. Id. at 40. As to the applicability of the LAD, the court held that Boy Scouts was not a place of public accommodation, or alternatively, that Boy Scouts was exempt under the distinctly private exception found at N.J.S.A. 10:5-5 l . Id. at 55. The court rejected Dale's common law claim, finding that the State's policy is that established by the NJLAD ... [and] not some prior common law policy. Id. at 45. Because the court believed that Boy Scouts' moral position in respect of active homosexuality was clear, it found that Boy Scouts' First Amendment freedom of expressive association prevent[ed] government from forcing [the organization] to accept Dale as an adult leader-member. Id. at 71.