Kevin McCarthy v. Patricia Fuller
714 F.3d 971
7th Cir.2013Background
- Longstanding, acrimonious RICO, trademark, copyright, and Indiana tort claims over devotions to Our Lady of America.
- Sister Ephrem and Sister Therese formed Contemplative Sisters of the Indwelling Trinity after leaving the Congregation in 1977, owning related artifacts and documents.
- Fuller (Patricia Fuller) contends McCarthy and Langsenkamp’s group stole property and that she is a Catholic nun; McCarthy contends she is not a nun and that the property belongs to the Church.
- Holy See issued rulings declaring Fuller not a member of any Catholic religious institute since 1983; these rulings were sought to be judicially noticed by McCarthy.
- District court allowed a jury to decide Fuller’s religious status, prompting an interlocutory appeal under Cohen collateral-order doctrine.
- Panel concludes the proper approach is to respect Holy See determinations; the court may not, and will not, decide religious questions; two other appeals are dismissed if non-final or moot.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Collateral-order review available for denial of judicial notice | McCarthy sought to defer to Holy See ruling via judicial notice | Fuller disputes religious-status determinations; court should not defer to non-party religious rulings | Yes; appellate jurisdiction granted; reverse denial of judicial notice |
| Whether secular court may determine Fuller’s religious status | McCarthy argues Holy See ruling can be considered; Fuller is not a nun | Court must not adjudicate religious questions; defer to church determinations | Religious-status issue cannot be decided by secular court or jury; Holy See ruling controls and must be applied |
| Mootness/prematurity of ownership appeal | Dispute over ecclesiastical property remains alive | Holy See declined to decide ownership; issue moot | Appeal 12-2157 moot as to ownership; no jurisdiction for premature jurisdictional challenge |
| Jurisdiction to review district-court rulings on ecclesiastical-property/entanglement | McCarthy seeks partial summary judgment and factual inquiry limits | Entanglement concerns unnecessary religious questions; provide jurisdictional basis | Appeal 12-2157 dismissed for lack of jurisdiction / premature; no basis to renounce jurisdiction absent entanglement |
| No finality; no Rule 54(b) certification; no jurisdiction over Fuller’s appeal | Some rulings are final, others not | Lack of final judgment justifies dismissal | No jurisdiction for appeal 12-2262; dismissed |
Key Cases Cited
- Cohen v. Beneficial Industrial Loan Corp., 337 U.S. 541 (1949) (collateral-order doctrine prerequisites; irreparable harm)
- Mitchell v. Forsyth, 472 U.S. 511 (1985) (immunity claims and collateral-order review; separation from merits)
- Hosanna-Tabor Evangelical Lutheran Church & School v. EEOC, 132 S. Ct. 694 (2012) (secular courts must not adjudicate religious doctrine)
- Serbian Eastern Orthodox Diocese v. Milivojevich, 426 U.S. 696 (1976) (jurisdictional restraint on secular review of church decisions)
- Kedroff v. St. Nicholas Cathedral, 344 U.S. 94 (1952) (religious autonomy and government noninterference)
- Tomic v. Catholic Diocese of Peoria, 442 F.3d 1036 (2006) (example of court deciding independent of religious authority)
- Jones v. Wolf, 443 U.S. 595 (1979) (limits on church governance entanglement in secular courts)
- Presbytery of Ohio Valley, Inc. v. OPC, Inc., 973 N.E.2d 1099 (Indiana 2012) (principles on whether religious questions entangle court jurisdiction)
- Serbian Orthodox Church Congregation of St. Demetrius v. Kelemen, 256 N.E.2d 212 (Ohio 1970) (state court deference to religious status and property)