JOHN DOE 1, ET AL. v. WOODLAND PRESBYTERIAN, ET AL. - Articles

All Content


Posted by: Karen Belcher on Jun 3, 2022

Court: TN Court of Appeals

Attorneys 1: Gary K. Smith, Karen M. Campbell, and Jeffrey S. Rosenblum, Memphis, Tennessee, for the appellants, John Doe 1, John Doe 2, and John Doe 3.

Attorneys 2: Jeremy S. Rogers, Louisville, Kentucky, and Molly Glover and Lani D. Lester, Memphis, Tennessee, for the appellee, Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.), A Corporation.

Attorneys 3: Christopher L. Ehresman, Des Moines, Iowa, for the appellee, Woodland Presbyterian Church.

Attorneys 4: Jill M. Steinberg and Shayna A. Giles, Memphis, Tennessee, for the appellee, The Presbytery of the Mid-South, Inc.

Attorneys 5: William R. Johnson, Brentwood, Tennessee, for the appellee, Synod of Living Waters Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.), Inc.

Attorneys 6: Richard D. Underwood, Memphis, Tennessee, for the appellees, Evangelical Presbyterian Church and Presbytery of the Central South, Inc.

Attorneys 7: Kimberly M. Ingram, Nashville, Tennessee, for the appellee, Presbytery of Sheppards and Lapsley.

Attorneys 8: James B. Stanford, Pro Se appellee

Judge(s): SWINEY

This appeal arises from a lawsuit alleging that a number of Presbyterian church entities were negligent regarding the sexual abuse of minors by a Presbyterian clergyman. John Doe 1, John Doe 2, and John Doe 3 (“Plaintiffs”)1, members and/or attendees of Woodland Presbyterian Church (“Woodland”) in the 1990s, sued former pastor James B. Stanford (“Stanford”) and a host of Presbyterian institutional defendants for negligence in the Circuit Court for Shelby County (“the Trial Court”).2 The institutional defendants filed motions to dismiss, which were granted by the Trial Court. Plaintiffs appeal arguing, among other things, that the statute of limitations was tolled due to fraudulent concealment. They argue further that the Trial Court erred in dismissing their claim of negligent infliction of emotional distress stemming from certain of the institutional defendants allegedly releasing Plaintiffs’ names to the media in 2019. We affirm the Trial Court’s dismissal of Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.), A Corporation and Evangelical Presbyterian Church for lack of personal jurisdiction. However, we hold further, inter alia, that in view of the Tennessee Supreme Court’s holding in Redwing v. Catholic Bishop for the Diocese of Memphis, 363 S.W.3d 436 (Tenn. 2012), the Trial Court erred in dismissing Plaintiffs’ complaint at the motion to dismiss stage based upon the statute of limitations when Plaintiffs alleged that efforts were made by certain of the institutional defendants to hide the sexual abuse and a “whitewash” ensued. As Plaintiffs successfully alleged fraudulent concealment, we reverse the Trial Court with respect to the statute of limitations issue. We also reverse the Trial Court’s dismissal of Plaintiffs’ negligent infliction of emotional distress claim against Woodland and Presbytery of the Central South, Inc. We, therefore, affirm in part and reverse in part the judgment of the Trial Court, and remand for further proceedings consistent with this Opinion.

Attachments: