One of the multiple lawsuits currently pending against the Southern Baptist Convention and its various agencies got a green light to continue Nov. 22, despite objections that the case is “frivolous” and legal discovery could cause harm.
U.S. District Judge Jeffery Frensley, writing for the U.S. District Court of Middle Tennessee, ruled against a motion to stop discovery in the case brought by David and Mary Sills against defendants Eric Geiger, Jennifer Lyell, Guidepost Solutions, Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, and Al Mohler.
David Sills
Sills is a former professor at Southern Seminary who was fired in 2018 after admitting to an extramarital relationship with Jennifer Lyell, a former student who went on to become an executive at Lifeway Christian Resources in Nashville. Lyell contends she was a victim of sexual abuse and manipulation; Sills contends it was a consensual relationship.
The case became a centerpiece of debate about mishandled sexual abuse claims in the SBC when Baptist Press, the denominational news service, published an article saying the relationship had been consensual, when she had gone public in an effort to speak against abuse. Eventually, the SBC Executive Committee offered a public apology to Lyell, who received an undisclosed financial settlement from her complaint.
Sills contends he was defamed by Lyell’s description of their relationship and says that defamation was aided by the SBC, Southern Seminary and Mohler, among others. He originally filed suit against a host of defendants in an Alabama court, then later filed a similar suit in Tennessee.
Some of those defendants had asked the Tennessee court to stay all legal discovery on the case pending resolution of a separate motion to dismiss the case entirely.
They argued: “Even if this case never makes it to trial, permitting discovery will expose the denomination’s internal investigation to secular scrutiny and conflicts with the separation of church and state principles at the core of the ecclesiastical abstention doctrine. Moreover, a stay is also appropriate due to the woefully deficient nature of plaintiffs’ complaint.”
The ecclesial abstention doctrine is a key legal concept that says secular courts may not interfere in the internal disputes of religious bodies. Applying — or not applying — that doctrine is key to several other cases currently pending against the SBC or its entities.
The Sillses contend the case at hand does not involve religious doctrine and therefore should not be subject to the ecclesial abstention doctrine. Judge Frensley ruled: “Without expressing any opinions as to the merits of the defendants’ motions to dismiss, a brief overview of the parties briefing and arguments indicate that the subject matter and personal jurisdiction issues at hand are ‘fairly debatable.’”
Also, the judge said claims that the lawsuit is frivolous are not self-evident. He quoted an earlier court precedent to say: “Reviewing the pleadings and pending dispositive motions, ‘this is simply not one of the rare cases where a complaint patently lacks merit such that staying discovery pending’ resolution of the motions to dismiss is appropriate.”
This is one of 28 lawsuits involving the SBC currently being tracked on the Twitter site SBCLitigation.
Related articles:
Lyell asks Alabama court to dismiss Sills lawsuit for lack of jurisdiction
Sills lawsuit misrepresents a piece of evidence, and that error got highlighted by Ascol and Basham
SBC Executive Committee publicly apologizes to sexual abuse survivor