Jane Doe v. Coe

• Citation: 2017 IL App (2d) 160875,83 N.E.3d 612
• Decision Date: 17 August 2017
• Docket Number: No. 2-16-0875.,2-16-0875.
• Parties: Jane DOE, a Minor, BY her Mother and Next Friend, Jane A. DOE, and by her Father and Next Friend, John Doe; Jane A. Doe, Individually; and John Doe, Individually, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. Chad COE; the First Congregational Church of Dundee, Illinois; Pastor Aaron James; the Fox Valley Association Illinois Conference of the United Church of Christ; the Illinois Conference of the United Church of Christ; the United Church of Christ; the General Synod of the United Church of Christ; and the United Church of Christ Board, Defendants (The Fox Valley Association Illinois Conference of the United Church of Christ; the Illinois Conference of the United Church of Christ; the United Church of Christ; the General Synod of the United Church of Christ; and the United Church of Christ Board, Defendants-Appellees).
• Court: United States Appellate Court of Illinois

2017 IL App (2d) 160875
83 N.E.3d 612

Jane DOE, a Minor, BY her Mother and Next Friend, Jane A. DOE, and by her Father and Next Friend, John Doe; Jane A. Doe, Individually; and John Doe, Individually, Plaintiffs-Appellants,
v.
Chad COE; the First Congregational Church of Dundee, Illinois; Pastor Aaron James; the Fox Valley Association Illinois Conference of the United Church of Christ; the Illinois Conference of the United Church of Christ; the United Church of Christ; the General Synod of the United Church of Christ; and the United Church of Christ Board, Defendants

(The Fox Valley Association Illinois Conference of the United Church of Christ; the Illinois Conference of the United Church of Christ; the United Church of Christ; the General Synod of the United Church of Christ; and the United Church of Christ Board, Defendants-Appellees).

No. 2-16-0875.

Appellate Court of Illinois, Second District.

Opinion filed August 17, 2017

83 N.E.3d 614

Francis C. Lipuma, of Law Office of Francis C. Lipuma, of Chicago, and Kevin M. Lyons, of Lyons Law Group, LLC, of Downers Grove, for appellants.

James E. Abbott and Michael L. Hahn, of Litchfield Cavo LLP, of Chicago, for appellees.

OPINION

JUSTICE BIRKETT delivered the judgment of the court, with opinion.

¶ 1 Plaintiffs, Jane Doe, Jane A. Doe, and John Doe, brought claims against several individuals and entities that were part of the United Church of Christ (UCC). The claims were based on the sexual misconduct of Chad Coe during his tenure as youth pastor at the First Congregational Church of Dundee, Illinois (FCC), a congregation within the UCC. Plaintiffs alleged that Coe groomed Jane Doe, a minor and member of the FCC's youth group, and eventually had sex with her on FCC's property. Defendants in this appeal are the UCC, the UCC Board, the General Synod of the UCC, the Illinois Conference of the UCC (IUCC), and the Fox Valley Association of the Illinois Conference of the UCC. The trial court dismissed with prejudice plaintiffs' claims against defendants, but we reverse and remand for further proceedings.

¶ 2 I. BACKGROUND

¶ 3 In their complaint, plaintiffs alleged that defendants were negligent in the hiring, supervision, and retention of Coe. Defendants filed a motion to dismiss under section 2-619.1 of the Code of Civil Procedure (Code) ( 735 ILCS 5/2-619.1 (West 2014) ), combining arguments for dismissal under section 2-615 and section 2-619 of the Code ( 735 ILCS 5/2-615, 2-619 (West 2014)).

¶ 4 "A section 2-615 motion attacks the legal sufficiency of the plaintiff's claims, while a section 2-619 motion admits the legal sufficiency of the claims but raises defects, defenses, or other affirmative matter, appearing on the face of the complaint or established by external submissions, that defeats the action." Aurelius v. State Farm Fire & Casualty Co. , 384 Ill. App. 3d 969, 972-73, 323 Ill.Dec. 739, 894 N.E.2d 765 (2008). For the section 2-619 component of their motion, defendants submitted the affidavits of Jorge Morales and John Dorhauer as affirmative matter defeating plaintiffs' allegation that Coe was defendants' employee at the relevant time.

¶ 5 Morales averred that he was the "Conference Minister" of the IUCC, while Dorhauer claimed that he was the "General Minister and President" of the UCC. Both affiants stated that they were "knowledgeable regarding the Constitution and Bylaws of the [UCC] as well as the ecclesiastical structure of the [UCC]." Both affiants described the UCC as "an unincorporated Protestant religious association consisting of Local Churches, Associations, Conferences and a General Synod." They asserted that those various entities within the UCC were "separate, distinct, and autonomous," and therefore "free to choose the manner and methods in which they conduct their own business affairs." To support their claims about the organizational structure of the UCC, Morales and Dorhauer quoted the UCC Constitution. According to Morales and Dorhauer, Coe was strictly the employee of the FCC and not of defendants. Defendants were not involved, nor had authority to be involved, in the hiring of Coe by the FCC. They also lacked authority to discipline or terminate Coe.

¶ 6 For the section 2-615 component of their motion to dismiss, defendants contended

83 N.E.3d 615

that plaintiffs failed to allege facts establishing that defendants knew or should have known of Coe's particular unfitness for the position of youth pastor.

¶ 7 In their response to the motion to dismiss, plaintiffs asserted that the affidavits of Morales and Dorhauer were, in several respects, out of compliance with Illinois Supreme Court Rule 191(a) (eff. Jan. 4, 2013). One deficiency pointed out by plaintiffs was that neither Morales nor Dorhauer attached the Constitution and Bylaws of the UCC, which each affiant cited as support for his assertions about the UCC's organization. Subsequently, defendants attached copies of the UCC Constitution and Bylaws to their reply in support of their motion to dismiss. (While the record indicates that the Constitution and Bylaws are separate documents, we refer to them collectively, after the parties' usage on appeal.)

¶ 8 The trial court found merit in both components of defendants' motion to dismiss. The court determined that plaintiffs failed to allege that defendants "knew or should have known about [Coe's] background or his particular unfitness for [his] job [as youth pastor]." On the section 2-619 aspect of defendants' challenge, the court implicitly rejected plaintiffs' argument that the affidavits of Morales and Dorhauer were deficient under Rule 191(a). The court found that the affidavits were "conclusive on * * * autonomous relationship, the nonhierarchical formation of the church and the formation of the [UCC] as a congregational...