Update from the General Counsel of The Mother Church
Weaver, et al. V. Wood, et al.
The General Counsel of The Mother Church has previously reported on the case known as Weaver, et al. V. Wood, et al., See report from the General Counsel to members of The Mother Church dated August 11, 1995. (To receive a copy of this report, or of papers filed or court orders entered in the case, write to: Office of the General Counsel, A–166; The First Church of Christ, Scientist; 175 Huntington Avenue; Boston, MA 02115–3187 U.S.A.) and in the September 25, 1995, Sentinel explained that on August 30, 1995, the Massachusetts Superior Court denied the motion for summary judgment filed by present and former officers of The Mother Church and The Christian Science Publishing Society. Events since then are summarized below.
On September 29, 1995, the defendant officers petitioned the Massachusetts Appeals Court for permission to file an appeal from the Superior Court's decision. In support of that petition, an amicus curiae ("friend-of-the-court") brief was filed with the Appeals Court by thirteen prominent religious organizations: Americans United for the Separation of Church and State, The National Council of The Churches of Christ in the USA., The Episcopal Diocese of Massachusetts, The Christian Legal Society, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, The Church of the Nazarene, The National Association of Evangelicals, The Reorganized Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, The General Conference of Seventh-Day Adventists, The New England Conference of the United Methodist Church, The Presbyterian Church USA, The United States Catholic Conference, and The Worldwide Church of God.
On November 9, 1995, Justice Jacobs of the Appeals Court granted the defendants' request for appellate review. In his order, Justice Jacobs said:
After hearing, argument by counsel, and review of the record ..., it appears that the dispute between the parties ... may implicate issues of the internal organization of The First Church of Christ, Scientist, in Boston, and, therefore, may involve prohibited intrusion in liberties protected by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution. ... [T]he accounting and injunctive relief and the discovery sought by the plaintiffs ..., in some respects, may impinge on First Amendment liberties. In order to avoid irremediable encroachment on those liberties by the process of judicial inquiry and perhaps define the permissible limits of this litigation, if it is to proceed, it is appropriate that interlocutory appellate review be undertaken.
A comprehensive report of these developments may be found in the November 13, 1995, issue of The Christian Science Monitor.
In accordance with the Appeals Court's order, the defendants filed a notice of appeal by December 1, 1995. The parties now begin the process of preparing and filing appellate briefs, and oral argument, which could be completed by about the fall of 1996. The decision by the Appeals Court would come later. (Court rules permit Massachusetts' highest court, the Supreme Judicial Court [SJC], to hear this appeal instead of the Appeals Court, if the SJC decides to take the case on its own or if it grants the request of a party for SJC review.)
While the case is on appeal, all proceedings in the lower court (Superior Court) will cease pending the outcome of the appeal. This means that the parties will not begin any "discovery" (exchanging documents, answering questions under oath, etc.), and no trial will be conducted, while the appeal is pending.
Recent developments have taken place in two cases challenging the practice of Christian Science healing for children. We have previously reported on these cases in the May 15, 1995, August 1, 1994, and July 4, 1994, issues of the Sentinel.
Lundman v. McKown
You may recall that in early April 1995 the Minnesota Court of Appeals found The Mother Church, the Committee on Publication for Minnesota, and the Christian Science nursing facility (Clifton House) not to have been negligent in a case brought by the father (plaintiff) of eleven-year-old Ian Lundman, who died in 1989. Thus, the Court of Appeals overturned a jury's award of compensatory damages against these three defendants, as well as the punitive damages award against the Church. However, the Court of Appeals sustained the jury's award of $1.5 million in compensatory damages against the boy's mother and stepfather, the Christian Science practitioner, and the nurse who cared for the boy during his illness.
Since our last report in the May 15, 1995, Sentinel, parties on both sides of the case petitioned the Minnesota Supreme Court, asking it to review the decision of the Court of Appeals. In an order released May 31, 1995, the Minnesota Supreme Court denied the petitions for review, thereby letting the decision of the Court of Appeals stand.
On August 29, 1995, the mother, stepfather, practitioner, and nurse (the remaining defendants) filed a Petition for Writ of Certiorari with the United States Supreme Court, asking our nation's highest court to review the Minnesota Court of Appeals decision upholding the jury's verdict against them.
Significantly, in support of this Petition, an amicus curiae ("friend-of-the-court") brief was filed with the United States Supreme Court by a number of major religious organizations: The Archdiocese of St. Paul and Minneapolis, The Baptist Joint Committee on Public Affairs, The Christian Church (Disciples of Christ), The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, The Church of the Nazarene, The National Association of Evangelicals, The Reorganized Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, The General Conference of Seventh-Day Adventists, and The Worldwide Church of God.
In response, on September 28, 1995, the plaintiff filed a Cross-Petition with the United States Supreme Court, asking the Court to review the Minnesota Court Appeals decision rejecting the imposition of liability against The Mother Church and the Committee on Publication for Minnesota. More recently, the U.S. Supreme Court asked the plaintiff to file a direct response to the defendants' Petition for Writ of Certiorari, by December 21, 1995.
It might not be until sometime in January or February 1996 that the Supreme Court decides which aspects of the appeal it will take (if any). If the Supreme Court decides not to take any part of the appeal, the decision of the Minnesota Court of Appeals will stand. If, however, the Supreme Court decides to take some aspect of the appeal, the parties will file comprehensive briefs, and the case will be orally argued before the high court later in 1996.
The defense fund for this case continues to financially assist the legal defense of individual defendants in the case. The defense fund for the Lundman case is: Minnesota Christian Science Legal Fund Trust; Loop Station, P.O. Box 2891; Minneapolis, MN 55402 U.S.A.
Quigley v. The First Church of Christ, Scientist, et al.
Also in the May 15, 1995, Sentinel we reported that in a similar "wrongful death" case in California, the plaintiff (mother of the boy who passed on), was appealing the dismissal of The Mother Church, the Committee on Publication for Southern California, a Christian Science practitioner and nurse, a Christian Science Visiting Nurse Service, and the boy's grandmother. Briefs have been filed with the California Court of Appeals by all parties on both sides of the case. The plaintiff has requested oral argument before the Court. However, the Court of Appeals has yet to schedule a date for the hearing.
This defense fund has a continuing need for contributions to defray the cost of the ongoing proceedings. Those who would like to assist the defense of individual defendants in this case may contact the following organization:
Defense Trust Fund for Christian Scientists
P.O. Box 5790
Sherman Oaks, CA 91403
U.S.A.
