Molko v. Holy Spirit Ass'n for Unification of World Christianity

Citation198 Cal.App.3d 199,224 Cal.Rptr. 817
CourtCalifornia Court of Appeals
Decision Date31 March 1986
PartiesPreviously published at 198 Cal.App.3d 199 198 Cal.App.3d 199 David MOLKO, Plaintiff, Cross-defendant and Appellant; Tracy Leal, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. HOLY SPIRIT ASSOCIATION FOR the UNIFICATION OF WORLD CHRISTIANITY et al. Defendants, Cross-complainants and Appellants. HOLY SPIRIT ASSOCIATION FOR the UNIFICATION OF WORLD CHRISTIANITY et al., Cross-complainants and Appellants, v. Neil MAXWELL, et al., Cross-defendants and Respondents. AO25338, AO20935.

Kelly, Leal & Olimpia, Stanley F. Leal, Sunnyvale, for appellants: Molko et al.

Friedman, Sloan & Ross, Jeffrey S. Ross, San Francisco, for appellants: Holy Spirit Ass'n et al.

Shapiro & Shapiro, Carl B. Shapiro, Alysworth C. Green, San Anselmo, for respondents: Maxwell and Alexander.

KLINE, Presiding Justice.

These cases present two general questions: (1) whether, consistent with the free exercise clause of the First Amendment, former members of a religious organization can maintain causes of action against that organization for fraud and deceit, intentional infliction of emotional distress and false imprisonment and can claim restitution for financial contributions made to the organization; and (2) whether the religious organization can maintain a cross-complaint against a former member and other persons for violation of its civil rights under federal and state statutes.

These appeals arise out of one action in the superior court and have been consolidated on this court's own motion for decision herein. In No. AO25338 plaintiffs David Molko and Tracy Leal appeal from a summary judgment entered in favor of defendants Holy Spirit Association for the Unification of World Christianity and New Education Development Systems, Inc. (hereafter collectively referred to as "the Unification Church" or "the Church"). 1 Also in No. A025338, the Unification Church cross-appeals from a judgment of dismissal entered after the sustaining of a demurrer without leave to amend as to its amended cross-complaint against Molko. In No. A020935, the Unification Church appeals from a judgment of dismissal entered after the sustaining of demurrers without leave to amend as to its amended cross-complaint against cross-defendants Neil Maxwell and Joseph Alexander, Sr.

We conclude that the court below properly granted summary judgment in favor of the Unification Church on the complaint and affirm that judgment. We also conclude, however, that the trial court erroneously sustained the demurrers to the Church's cross-complaint against Molko, Maxwell and Alexander without leave to amend. Consequently, we reverse the judgments of dismissal entered in favor of those parties.

I. Introduction

Molko and Leal are former members of the Unification Church, a religious organization which follows the teachings of the Reverend Sun Myung Moon. 2 While members of the Church, they were on separate occasions forcibly abducted from public streets by third parties and persuaded to relinquish their belief in and association with the Church. Thereafter, on July 25, 1980, they filed the instant complaint, alleging that they had been fraudulently induced to join the Unification Church through a variety of deceptive tactics on the part of some of its members. Plaintiffs each asserted causes of action for fraud and deceit, intentional infliction of emotional distress and false imprisonment. Molko also alleged a cause of action for restitution of a $6,000 gift assertedly obtained by the Church through the exertion of undue influence. 3

On April 7, 1982, the Church filed a first amended cross-cross-complaint against Molko, Maxwell and Alexander, as well as against other cross-defendants not involved in these appeals. The cross-complaint was based essentially upon what the Church refers to as "deprogramming" activities, the conspiring to kidnap and actual kidnap of members of the Church by non-believers for purposes of forcing those members to abandon their religious beliefs and to terminate their association with the Church. Claims for violation of the civil rights of the Church and its members were asserted against all three of these cross-defendants under federal and state civil rights statutes. (42 U.S.C., § 1985(3); Civ. Code, §§ 51.7 and 52.) Additionally, a claim for full or partial indemnity was asserted against Maxwell, alleging that any damages for which the Church were liable to Molko had been caused, in whole or in part, by Maxwell, who had kidnapped and "deprogrammed" Molko.

II. The Appeal of Molko and Leal from the Grant of Summary Judgment to the Church.

On May 26, 1983, the Church filed a motion for summary judgment or, in the alternative, for summary adjudication of issues as to plaintiff Leal, and filed a separate similar motion as to plaintiff Molko. Insofar as relevant to the present appeal, the Church urged in support of its motions that plaintiffs had not relied upon any misrepresentations of Church members which proximately resulted in any damage of which plaintiffs complained; that any misrepresentations or failure to disclose Church members' religious affiliation, or other conduct of which plaintiffs complained, was protected by the First Amendment and could not form the basis of a claim for fraud or intentional infliction of emotional distress; that the conduct alleged in support of the claim for emotional distress was not outrageous; that plaintiffs had not been subject to any involuntary confinement which would support a claim for false imprisonment; and that plaintiffs consented to participate in all conduct which they claim caused them distress or damage. Additionally, as to plaintiff Molko, the Church urged that his claims for fraud and intentional infliction of emotional distress were barred by the statute of limitations; and that the Church was entitled to judgment on his claim for restitution of a gift because the evidence demonstrated that he made the $6,000 contribution because of his then existing religious beliefs.

Although Molko and Leal purport to argue in their briefs that the trial court erred in granting summary judgment because there are triable issues of fact as to each cause of action, the record and briefs herein demonstrate that, with a minor exception which we deem immaterial (see infra, p. 882, fn. 5), the facts regarding the occurrences giving rise to this law suit are essentially undisputed for purposes of the motion for summary judgment. 4 It is, rather, the legal consequences flowing from those facts which are in dispute. We will summarize the facts with respect to each plaintiff separately.

Facts as to Plaintiff David Molko

David Molko arrived in San Francisco in December 1978. A 27-year-old graduate of Temple University School of Law, he had recently taken and passed the July 1978 examination for admission to the Pennsylvania bar. He had come to San Francisco thinking that he might try to find a job or take the California bar examination. He was quite uncertain about his future at that time.

In January 1979, Molko was approached by Mark Bush and Ernest Patton at a bus stop in San Francisco. They told him they were involved with a group called the Creative Community Project which was interested in certain environmental issues. When Molko inquired about the associational ties of the group, he was told it was composed of an "international community" of professionals who lived together and often discussed world events and topics of interest to the community. Molko asked whether the group had any religious affiliation and was told that it did not. Bush and Patton invited Molko to dinner that evening at the group's house on Bush Street in San Francisco.

Molko attended the dinner, where there appeared to be a number of guests such as himself. Molko was not allowed to have any conversation with the other guests and was spoken to constantly by members of the group during dinner and after a lecture that followed. After viewing a slide show of a farm in Booneville apparently operated by the group, he was invited to spend a weekend there and was told a bus was leaving that evening. Molko was interested and agreed to go. Prior to boarding the bus to Booneville, Molko signed a form, setting forth his name, address and telephone number. 5 At Booneville Molko learned that the group derived its teachings from the Reverend Sun Myung Moon and many other different philosophers. There was at that time no mention of the Unification Church or "Moonies". Molko was at all times free to leave Booneville and knew that buses returning to San Francisco left daily. He saw no evidence that anyone else was being restrained at Booneville against his or her will.

During the week of January 29, 1979, Molko visited another group site known as "Camp K." It was during this visit that Molko first learned that his new associates were all followers of the Unification Church and Reverend Moon. He nevertheless remained with the organization. Molko spent approximately five to seven weeks at Camp K. He was not physically restrained there and knew he was free to leave.

Thereafter Molko returned to San Francisco and participated in Church activities such as fund-raising and "witnessing" (recruiting new persons to join the Church). On April 6, 1979, Molko made a donation of $6,000 to the Church. At Church expense, Molko attended a bar review course at Hastings Law School. He took the California bar examination in July 1979. On July 26, 1979, upon leaving the last session of the bar examination, Molko was forcibly abducted by two persons and persuaded to relinquish his belief in the Church. His association with the Unification Church terminated at that time.

Facts as to Plaintiff Tracy Leal

On or about June 7, 1979, Tracy Leal, then 19 years of age, was traveling by bus from her home in Santa Clara County to visit Humboldt State University, where she...

To continue reading

Request your trial
4 cases
  • In re The Bible Speaks
    • United States
    • U.S. Bankruptcy Court — District of Massachusetts
    • 19 Mayo 1987
    ... ... it "seems" she had been hearing from the Holy Spirit. The Claimant's normal annual gifts to ... ); Holy Spirit Association for the Unification of World Christianity v. Tax Commission of City ...     The Church places heavy reliance on Molko v. Holy Spirit Association for the Unification of ... ...
  • The Bible Speaks v. Dovydenas
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — District of Massachusetts
    • 25 Enero 1988
    ... ... See Molko v. Holy Spirit Association for the Unification of World Christianity, 179 Cal.App.3d 450, 224 Cal. Rptr ... ...
  • Holy Spirit Ass'n for Unification of World Christianity v. Superior Court of County of Alameda (Dole)
    • United States
    • California Supreme Court
    • 24 Julio 1986
    ...OF ALAMEDA, Respondent; DOLE, Real Party in Interest. Supreme Court of California, In Bank. July 24, 1986. Prior report: Cal.App., 224 Cal.Rptr. 817. Real Party in Interest's petition for review BIRD, C.J., and MOSK, BROUSSARD and GRODIN, JJ., concur. ...
  • Molko v. Holy Spirit Ass'n for Unification of World Christianity
    • United States
    • California Supreme Court
    • 24 Julio 1986
    ...et al., Appellants; Neil Maxwell et al., Respondents. Supreme Court of California, In Bank. July 24, 1986. Prior report: Cal.App., 224 Cal.Rptr. 817. Petition for review BIRD, C.J., and MOSK, BROUSSARD and GRODIN, JJ., concur. ...
1 books & journal articles
  • Joining a 'cult': religious choice or psychological aberration?
    • United States
    • Journal of Law and Health Vol. 11 No. 1-2, March 1996
    • 22 Marzo 1996
    ...Rptr. 217 (Cal Ct. App. 4th Dist. 1989). (5) Id. at 231. (6) Molko v. Holy Spirit Assoc. for the Unification of World Christianity, 224 Cal. Rptr. 817,825 (Cal. Ct. App. 1st Dist., rev'd in part, 46 Cal. 3d 1092 (1988), cert. denied, 490 U.S. 1084 (7) Stack, supra note 2. (8) J. Gordon Melt......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT