Jane Doe-1 v. Corporation of the President of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints
239 W. Va. 428
| W. Va. | 2017Background
- Plaintiffs are nine minors and their parents alleging negligence, fraud, intentional infliction of emotional distress, assault, battery, and civil conspiracy arising from Michael Jensen’s sexual abuse.
- Circuit court granted UD-1 summary judgment on conspiracy and later granted in limine rulings that eliminated much circumstantial evidence supporting conspiracy.
- Church defendants and Jensens were later granted summary judgment on conspiracy; the court certified final judgments under Rule 54(b).
- Plaintiffs contend extensive evidentiary rulings and exclusion of key evidence prevented a fair trial on conspiracy, notice, and prevention of abuse.
- On appeal, this Court reverses the summary judgments and in limine rulings and remands for further proceedings consistent with the opinion.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Rule 54(b) certification standard | Province prong favors appellate review due to final disposition of conspiracy against all. | Certification improper as conspiracy inseparable from underlying torts. | No abuse of discretion; Rule 54(b) proper to review. |
| Evidentiary use of Utah proceedings (SBRA) for notice | Utah SBRA and 2004–2007 proceedings show notice to Church leaders and parents. | Utah evidence is dissimilar, prejudicial, and wasteful; not probative of West Virginia conspiracy. | Exclusion reversed; Utah evidence properly probative to notice and conspiracy. |
| Effect of in limine rulings on conspiracy proof | In limine rulings materially shaped the conspiracy claim; should be reviewed with summary judgment recourse. | In limine rulings are separate and do not control conspiracy viability. | In limine rulings reviewed and found to have affected the conspiracy outcome; remanded. |
| UD-1 conspiracy participation | UD-1 had inside knowledge, monitored Chris Jensen, and communicated with Stake Grow; could show conspiracy. | No duty to warn; isolated acts do not prove conspiracy; credibility issues dispose. | Jury could infer conspiracy; reversed summary judgment for UD-1. |
Key Cases Cited
- Province v. Province, 196 W.Va. 473 (1996) (two-prong Rule 54(b) review; deference to trial court on delay)
- Lloyd v. Kyle, 26 W.Va. 534 (1885) (review all preceding non-appealable decrees when appeal from appealable decree)
- Riffe v. Armstrong, 197 W.Va. 626 (1996) (Rule 54(b) finality; includes syllabus point on review of in limine rulings)
- Dunn v. Rockwell, 225 W.Va. 43 (2009) (civil conspiracy defined; liability for wrongful acts of conspirators)
- Slack v. Kanawha County Housing and Redevelopment Authority, 188 W.Va. 144 (1992) (damages for conspiracy may differ from underlying tort; separate damages possible)
- Williams v. Precision Coil, Inc., 194 W.Va. 52 (1995) (summary judgment standards; credibility and inferences are jury functions)