Sherman Vs Divine Light Case Analysis

3035 Words13 Pages
Memo To: Attorney Janet Jones From: Jennifer Calderone Date: 4/3/12 Re: Sherman vs. Church of the Divine Light CC: Professor Steven Zakrocki, Tort Law (PA310-01) Introduction: Mr. and Mrs. Rob Sherman want to sue the Church of the Divine Light for the negligent actions used by the church on their minor child, Rob Jr. The Sherman’s want to start legal proceedings against the church to cover the damages caused by the church in using unethical practices on their child. Tort law is a category of civil law, which provides protection against a civil wrong. The Sherman’s have hired us to determine if they will have a successful case against the Church of the Divine Light. Herein, you will find my personal analysis of the case and the…show more content…
In Robin George v. International Society for Krishna Consciousness, 213 Cal. App. 3d 729 (1989), cert. Denied_U.S._, 110 S. Ct. 2168, 109 L. Ed. 3d 498 (1990), to give an idea of false imprisonment. In this case, the court helped identify some of the points, which helps to identify the act of false detention. The court could not find anything in this case that proved that the victim was forced for detention. In this case, the victim was less than 14 years of age at the time of leaving home and the victim had no evidence that could prove that he was falsely detained. If the action of false detention is identified with any necessary action, it is often considered as a brainwashing of the victim (George v. International Society for Krishna Consciousness). In the case of Rob Jr., he was detained falsely by the Church of the Divine Light, the authority of the church, Tom Marsden, forced him to stay within the boundaries of the church by threatening that if he left the church premises he would be thrown into the eternal fires of hell. This was the provoking action, which was attempted by the church authority to imprison Rob Jr. In this case, for proving false imprisonment, the act of forcing Rob Jr. can be the essential element to help the Sherman’s take action the Church of the Divine…show more content…
“Brainwashing is the application of specific and identifiable techniques that are intended to, and do, undermine an individual’s ability to reason and impair his capacity to exercise an informed consent and replaces those functions with indiscriminate and unconditional obedience to the commands of a single leader,” as stated by Ford Green who was the attorney in Molko, (1190). Brainwashing theories have had different levels of success in the court systems. To see this, we can compare Merone v. Holy Spirit Assn., 125 Misc. 2d 1061, 480 N.Y.S. 2D 706 (1984); Turner v. Unification Church, 602 F.2d 458 (1979); Lewis v. Holy Spirit Assn., 589 f. Supp. 10 (1983). As stated in Molko v. Holy Spirit Assn., undue influence is that kind of influence or supremacy of one mind over another by which that other is prevented from acting according to his own wish or judgment, and occurs when one party uses its dominant psychological position in an unfair manner to induce the subservient party to consent to an agreement to which he would not otherwise have consented. In our case, Tom Marsden used this type of influence over Rob Jr. when he informed him “if you leave, you will be thrown into the eternal fires of hell and you will not be allowed

More about Sherman Vs Divine Light Case Analysis

Open Document