Sueing the WTBTS

by Watkins 8 Replies latest watchtower scandals

• 

  Watkins

  Does anyone know --- has anyone ever successfully sued the WTBTS after being disfellowshipped and losing the natural affections of their family, as per WTBTS directions to 'shun'? I guess it would be 'alienation of affection' or something else... I don't know.

  I'm LUCKY to have had no family members in the cult - but I've read horrendous stories of the effects disfellowshipping has had on others - lives effectively ruined by losing mates, children, parents, friends, jobs, homes... suicides, murder/suicide - all devestating results of the cult's edicts. That ain't livin'.... it's just waitin' to die...

  But I wondered if anyone had been successful against their 'dream team' of lawyers - I'm sure they could find tricky loopholes to avoid responsibility - it's what cult lawyers do...

  Thanks in advance -

  peace --- watkins
• 

  DaCheech

  i'm sure you would have to get over 1,000 people together and pool your $$$$ to be able to get a lawsuit that can withstand their $$$$ power, then you would have to prove losses (other thanm religious) that have been done..... I guess the only reasons wich the goverment might get involved is cases where your employer was JW, and he fired you?

  or maybe your landlord was JW, and theyu evicted you due to this policy?

  other than those or similiar civil rights cases they are protected to boot out anybody they want.... religious freedom at it's best!
• 

  garybuss

  At this point I wouldn't sue em, I'd send em a thank you card.
  
  Being shunned by a Witness . . . any Witness . . . is a gift.
  
  The best deals in my life have been the bad deals I got out of.
  
  
• 

  AllTimeJeff

  No, I don't think so. Precedent has been set that disfellowshipping is an internal matter. As long as JW's follow their own by laws, then currently, the courts in the USA will not interfere or impose punitive damages to one who is disfellowshipped.

  Generally, the one question on this subject in the Questions for Baptism constitutes in the eyes of the court a stating of the policy and your acceptance of this policy is represented by ones baptism.
• 

  Olin Moyles Ghost

  No. Former WT attorney Olin Moyle sued the Society and its officers for libel in the early 1940s (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Olin_R._Moyle). But the suit was not based on DF-ing/shunning.

  Forum members Barbara and Joe Anderson tried to do this after their experience with shunning, but the Tennessee Court of Appeals dismissed their suit (see http://www.tsc.state.tn.us/OPINIONS/Tca/PDF/071/WatchtowerOpn.pdf). For better or worse, U.S. courts are incredibly leery of venturing into the realm of religion. This practice is sometimes called "ecclesiastical abstention." The ecclesiastical abstention doctrine is based on the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, which protects the free exercise of religion. Courts have broadly interpreted this Amendment to prevent courts getting involved in issues of church law.

  Now, it is possible that an alienation of affections claim could survive a motion to dismiss...provided the DF'd person is in one of the eight states that still allows claims for A of A (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alienation_of_affections). Note that A of A only relates to the affections of a spouse, so a DF'd person could not recover for damage to the relationship with other family members or friends. But if a DF'd person can show that his relationship with his JW spouse was sufficiently damaged by the DF-ing, then he may be able to state a claim for A of A.

  Of course, I would anticipate the WT lawyers mounting a vigorous argument that the case should be dismissed under the ecclesiastical abstention doctrine.
• 

  rebel8

  Do a search on this forum--it's been discussed quite thoroughly--lots of info for you.
• 

  Honesty

  I sent a Thank You note to Brooklyn Bethel thanking them for having the local congregations announce that I had disassociated my self from the "Christian" Congregation of Jehovah's Witnesses after I Da'd.

  It made shunning the JW's go a lot smoother because when they see me in Wal-Mart they run to another aisle.
• 

  Roddy

  I think the WTS is on weak ground if another Witness in, say in a medical or legal matter, broke professional confidentiality in order to snitch on you to your congregation via religious contacts.

  While silently "encouraging" the extra congregational snitching, I'm sure the WTS will let the snitcher hang out to dry alone if he or she is found out. So you have to show that your local elders had to be contacted with the damning information by help from the WTS and there is simply no way for the snitch to pass that information to your local congregation in any other way.

  In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if the WTS will only limit themselves to giving the snitch the phone number of the PO so he or her can call the information in giving the appearance that the WTS had no active participation.

  Yep, that's my guess. LOL Well, it was a good mental excersize.
• 

  avishai

  I bet it happens alot. They just make folks sign gag orders contingent on settlement.