[W]hile appellees explain ... that "[t]he communication of the expulsion provided example of the religious values of the [S]chool to parent and student alike" ..., appellees do not contend that such religious rationale for the Post-expulsion Communications required that the Communications specifically allege that Eric brought a "penknife" or "weapon" to school. Thus, this is not a case in which religious authority would be directly relevant to a party’s showing on the merits of his or her opponent’s claims.... [N]eutral principles can be applied to determine whether the Post-expulsion Communications were defamatory.
Objective coverage of church-state and religious liberty developments, with extensive links to primary sources.
Wednesday, July 22, 2009
PA Supreme Court: Civil Courts Can Hear Defamation Claim Against Catholic School
In Connor v. Archdiocese of Philadelphia, (PA Sup. Ct., July 20, 2009), the Pennsylvania Supreme Court held that civil courts have jurisdiction over a suit growing out of the expulsion of a 7th-grade student from a Catholic parochial school. The student was expelled for allegedly bringing a penknife to school, a fact disputed by his parents. The student's parents sued the school, school officials and the archdiocese alleging that a letter and other communications about about the expulsion sent to the school community constituted defamation and negligent infliction of emotional distress. The lower courts had refused jurisdiction, finding that they could not review an ecclesiastical disciplinary decision or communications about it. The Supreme Court reversed, concluding: