Hope International University v. Superior Court

Good Law
119 Cal. App. 4th 719·14 Cal. Rptr. 3d 643·2004 Cal. App. LEXIS 945·2004 Daily Journal DAR 7406·2004 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 5427
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJune 18, 2004G032967California9,039 words

Opinion

Opinion

Sills, J.

I. Introduction

Hope International University (Hope), affiliated with the Church of Christ, fired two professors because of the perception that they had had an affair while one of the professor’s divorce was still pending. Both Hope and the Church of Christ take a dim view of that sort of thing, and in any event the university holds its professors to an “abstain from all appearance of evil” standard from I Thessalonians 5:22. Ironically, both professors taught in the marriage and family counseling department. They sued for marital status discrimination, breach of their employment agreement, and for promissory estoppel because one of the professors had, years before, moved his clinical psychological counseling center to the campus. The university brought a motion for summary judgment or, in the alternative, a motion for summary adjudication. The trial court denied the motion for summary judgment and refused to even consider summary adjudication because the university had not organized its points and authorities by cause of action. The university petitioned for writ relief, and, because the case raised important issues concerning the extent of the “ministerial exception”…

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.