A court in New York has ruled that polyamorous unions have the same rights as married couples.

A New York City eviction court ruled in favor of a polyamorous union (a union in which three or more people cohabit). Thus, the court, in fact, created a precedent that equalizes the rights of polyamorous unions and married couples, reports New York Post.

In West 49th St., LLC v. O'Neal, New York Civil Court Judge Karen May Bakdayan concluded that polyamorous unions are entitled to the same legal protections as a relationship between two persons. Three people were involved in the case: Scott Anderson and Marcius O'Neill, who lived together in an apartment in New York, and Anderson's husband, Robert Romano, who lived elsewhere.

The lease was drawn up in Anderson's name. And after his death, the owner of the building argued that O'Neal had no right to renew the lease in his name, since he was not a member of the deceased's family in the traditional sense of the word.

A lawyer for the property owner said O'Neal's affidavit, in which he identifies himself as a member of the family, is "a fairy tale."

The case returned to court after further investigation into the relationship of the three men.

In her decision, Judge Bakdayan stressed that the existence of a triad - no matter what relationship they were in - should not automatically dismiss O'Neal's claim for protection from eviction.

She added that same-sex couples have long had the same rights as heterosexual couples, but at the same time, according to the judge, extending the protection of the law only to unions consisting of two people no longer meets the requirements of society.

Bakdayan noted that the changes that have taken place in the United States since 1989, including changes in the definition of the family, play a significant role in this issue. The law has gone a long way in recognizing that a child can have more than two legal parents, she said.

“Why, then, are certain family relationships limited to two persons when it comes to obtaining the eviction protection that is granted to legal or blood relatives?” Bakdayan asked.

“Why does a person have to be committed to another person only in certain ways in order to be eligible for housing after the loved one leaves? she continued. “Should all non-traditional relationships involve only two people?”

On the subject: Amazing personal experience: a year ago my husband became my wife, now we are both happier

As a result, the judge concluded that polyamorous unions are no different from same-sex unions, in the case of which the courts take the side of such couples, although they often do not have the opportunity to formalize the marriage.