Rowe

Rowe v. Superior Court

Good Law
15 Cal. App. 4th 1711·19 Cal. Rptr. 2d 625·1993 Cal. App. LEXIS 554·93 Daily Journal DAR 6583·93 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 3846
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMay 25, 1993B070406California10,362 words

Opinion

Opinion

Croskey, J.

Petitioners Dee Rowe and S. Glover Rowe (collectively Rowe) seek a writ of mandate to overturn the trial court’s refusal to permit the amendment of Rowe’s complaint against the Church of Scientology of Orange County (Scientology) to allege a claim for punitive damages. Such pre-pleading permission by the court is a requirement imposed by Code of Civil Procedure section 425.14. Rowe attacks this legislation by asserting that it is unconstitutional on the grounds that it violates (1) California’s constitutional guarantee of a jury trial and (2) the establishment clause of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution. We conclude that Rowe is incorrect on both points. However, because it appears that the trial court may not have applied the proper standard in evaluating Rowe’s proposed amended pleading, we grant the writ.

Factual and Procedural Background

On October 3, 1991, Rowe filed a complaint against Scientology alleging claims for fraud, false imprisonment, assault, intentional infliction of emotional distress, invasion of privacy and deceptive trade practices. The allegations arose out of a relationship which began with a management and consulting contract…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.