Interesting.
Fisherman
JoinedPosts by Fisherman
-
11
Taped Broadcast of March 10, 2017 ARC hearing - youtube
by OrphanCrow inthank you to john redwood for making this available so quickly.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gzqvj0z7_ya.
-
Fisherman
-
182
The Danger of Settlements
by Tech49 ini was pondering the recent influx of lawsuits against wt, specifically in regards to the child abuse cases (ie.
conti, fessler, lopez, etc).. in each of these, wt has settled for an "undisclosed" amount, assumed to be in the millions of dollars each.
i know there are many many more cases, subject for a different thread i'm sure.. i was reading something completely unrelated a while back that mentioned the dangers of settlement agreements for a large corporation or business (not just wt).
-
Fisherman
Richard Oliver, thank you for kindly answering my questions without any color added.
-
182
The Danger of Settlements
by Tech49 ini was pondering the recent influx of lawsuits against wt, specifically in regards to the child abuse cases (ie.
conti, fessler, lopez, etc).. in each of these, wt has settled for an "undisclosed" amount, assumed to be in the millions of dollars each.
i know there are many many more cases, subject for a different thread i'm sure.. i was reading something completely unrelated a while back that mentioned the dangers of settlement agreements for a large corporation or business (not just wt).
-
Fisherman
The appeals court ruled that the documents are allowed to be given over, with third party information redacted,
both sides can go on a fishing expedition
With party names redacted, who can they fish for or what? And has wt handed over those documents?
-
182
The Danger of Settlements
by Tech49 ini was pondering the recent influx of lawsuits against wt, specifically in regards to the child abuse cases (ie.
conti, fessler, lopez, etc).. in each of these, wt has settled for an "undisclosed" amount, assumed to be in the millions of dollars each.
i know there are many many more cases, subject for a different thread i'm sure.. i was reading something completely unrelated a while back that mentioned the dangers of settlement agreements for a large corporation or business (not just wt).
-
Fisherman
And yes since the holder is the communicant then the clergy is bound by it.
So what about the Padron case where wt is being compelled do disclose privileged documents?
-
182
The Danger of Settlements
by Tech49 ini was pondering the recent influx of lawsuits against wt, specifically in regards to the child abuse cases (ie.
conti, fessler, lopez, etc).. in each of these, wt has settled for an "undisclosed" amount, assumed to be in the millions of dollars each.
i know there are many many more cases, subject for a different thread i'm sure.. i was reading something completely unrelated a while back that mentioned the dangers of settlement agreements for a large corporation or business (not just wt).
-
Fisherman
Apparently, there is not a lot of case law on this subject since about 1980.
Then, albeit state laws that mandate reporting, the church still has a Constitutional basis for claiming the privilege?
Yes or No?
-
182
The Danger of Settlements
by Tech49 ini was pondering the recent influx of lawsuits against wt, specifically in regards to the child abuse cases (ie.
conti, fessler, lopez, etc).. in each of these, wt has settled for an "undisclosed" amount, assumed to be in the millions of dollars each.
i know there are many many more cases, subject for a different thread i'm sure.. i was reading something completely unrelated a while back that mentioned the dangers of settlement agreements for a large corporation or business (not just wt).
-
Fisherman
Of course if a federal court has ruled that a state law is unconstitutional then that would take precedence over a state court's ruling.
So, are you saying that church protected communications cases have only been decided upon on a State level but not on a Federal Court level which could interpret Burger's decision even more?
Albeit state mandatory reporting laws, are church privilege communications also governed separately and concurrently under Federal Rule 506? Do State laws mandating church privilege disclosure immunize from liability under Federal law, for example 506 or the 1st Amendment? Do state mandating reporting laws nullify Federal law granting church non disclosure privilege?
Richard Oliver, I am saying that on a state level a state is in effect nullifying Federal law when it in essence revokes non disclosure privilege with statutory mandate reporting because it violates the confidentiality of the penitent even if the reported disclosed communication could not be used as evidence at a trial. Do you follow what I am saying?
-
182
The Danger of Settlements
by Tech49 ini was pondering the recent influx of lawsuits against wt, specifically in regards to the child abuse cases (ie.
conti, fessler, lopez, etc).. in each of these, wt has settled for an "undisclosed" amount, assumed to be in the millions of dollars each.
i know there are many many more cases, subject for a different thread i'm sure.. i was reading something completely unrelated a while back that mentioned the dangers of settlement agreements for a large corporation or business (not just wt).
-
Fisherman
Federal law does provide civil liability immunity if the report is made in food faith.
What I am referring to is Berger's decision on protected communications grounded on the 1st Amendment versus state law granting immunity for good faith reporting.
-
182
The Danger of Settlements
by Tech49 ini was pondering the recent influx of lawsuits against wt, specifically in regards to the child abuse cases (ie.
conti, fessler, lopez, etc).. in each of these, wt has settled for an "undisclosed" amount, assumed to be in the millions of dollars each.
i know there are many many more cases, subject for a different thread i'm sure.. i was reading something completely unrelated a while back that mentioned the dangers of settlement agreements for a large corporation or business (not just wt).
-
Fisherman
What a lot of people do just to be safe than sorry when it comes to anything legal that may involve them legally is to as ask an attorney first -one may have good intentions but the Courts may bnot see it that way and could get a person in trouble.
-
182
The Danger of Settlements
by Tech49 ini was pondering the recent influx of lawsuits against wt, specifically in regards to the child abuse cases (ie.
conti, fessler, lopez, etc).. in each of these, wt has settled for an "undisclosed" amount, assumed to be in the millions of dollars each.
i know there are many many more cases, subject for a different thread i'm sure.. i was reading something completely unrelated a while back that mentioned the dangers of settlement agreements for a large corporation or business (not just wt).
-
Fisherman
Richard Oliver, what is relevevant in the statutes that you posted now is the protected penitent communications as it applies to the state laws that you quoted:
Richard Oliver, can such "anyone" still be held liable under Federal Law?
Also,can any injured party resulting from a "good faith" report file a suit in a state court having subject matter without having the Court dismiss it prima facie challenging the "good faith" and is the good faith the only basis for a law suit. What is the burden of proof for "good faith" and who has the burden of proof should good faith be challenged?
-
182
The Danger of Settlements
by Tech49 ini was pondering the recent influx of lawsuits against wt, specifically in regards to the child abuse cases (ie.
conti, fessler, lopez, etc).. in each of these, wt has settled for an "undisclosed" amount, assumed to be in the millions of dollars each.
i know there are many many more cases, subject for a different thread i'm sure.. i was reading something completely unrelated a while back that mentioned the dangers of settlement agreements for a large corporation or business (not just wt).
-
Fisherman
Richard Oliver assuming that in one jurisdiction "good faith"reporting is exempt from liability, does the inverse also apply in such jurisdiction when a minister does not report "in good faith." Is such minister also exempt from liability?