Sidney Daily News - 10/20/2000
Way attorneys seek dismissal of suit involving former staff

Attorneys representing The Way International have filed a motion seeking a judgment and dismissal of a lawsuit filed by a couple who were former employees there.

In the motion filed recently in Shelby County Common Pleas Court, attorneys claim The Way, 5555 Wierwille Road, New Knoxville, is protected by the First Amendment against most of the claims alleged by Mrs. Allen and Mr. Allen. Regarding allegations of coerced sexual activity, defense attorneys claim they waited too long to make the allegations in court.

Former employees of The Way, the Allens claim they suffered humiliation, embarrassment and stress at the hands of The Way officials, and that officials attempted to "coerce" Mrs. Allen into engaging in sexual activity with the Rev. L. Craig Martindale, former president, between 1996 and 1999. The Allens resigned from The Way in 1999.

Martindale is named a defendant in the lawsuit along with the Rev. Rosalie F. Rivenbark. Martindale resigned as The Way president soon after the complaint was filed and was replaced by Rivenbark. Last month Martindale resigned from all official affiliations with The Way. Martindale claims he and Mrs. Allen had a consensual affair.

Defense attorneys Louis A. Columbo of Cleveland and Michael F. Boller of Sidney contend in the motion that the Allens’ complaint is grounded in two claims: that Mrs. Allen had sexual relations with Martindale, and that Mr. Allen was injured and overworked during his training in the Way Corps, an employee training program.

"Plaintiffs have no cognizable claim because (1) Mrs. Allen’s claim... is precluded by the one-year statute of limitations for alleged sexual assault, and (2) the rest of the claims, which ask this court to regulate how The Way practices its beliefs or how it conducts religious instruction and training for its ministers, are barred by the First Amendment... and are not susceptible of adjudication by civil courts," the motion argues. It notes the Ohio Third District Court of Appeals upheld a lower court decision to dismiss a claim against a religious organization on similar grounds.

The Allens are seeking $2 million on a claim of breach of contract and additional damages on other claims. They also claim The Way officials defrauded them of money, conspired against them and damaged their reputations. They claim damages totaling $56 million. They also claim the "mark and avoid" designation ordered by The Way leaders on former members defamed them.

The motion includes a summary of the allegations related to the sexual encounters. It claims the first encounter was in August 1996, and they had sexual relations four times, ending in May 1997. The motion claims she did not resist Martindale the first time and was a willing participant the other times.

In June 1998, the Board of Trustees leaned Martindale had a sexual relationship with another follower of The Way. Board members "chastised" Martindale and took steps to guard against another incident. The board learned of the encounters with Allen in March 1999, but the motion explained that since those encounters predated June 1998 and the measures the board took then, board members decided no additional action was necessary.

The motion claims the one-year time limit (statute of limitations) for assault and battery has expired, so the claims related to the sexual encounters should be dismissed. These allegations should be considered an assault case no matter how they are classified or phrased, the motion argues. It noted the Allens should have filed a complaint on these allegations by May 1998 to be considered. The lawsuit was filed last April.

On the other claims, the motion claims the First Amendment must be followed because allegations are based on the religious practices and beliefs of The Way. The motion presents arguments that the First Amendment prohibits courts from deciding matters of religious doctrine, practice, policy or faith; it prohibits courts from deciding matters of church administration, organization or discipline; it prohibits courts from deciding claims based on The Way’s religious beliefs; it protects the practices and policies that are required of all followers of The Way; and it protects The Way’s practice of "marking and avoiding" former members.

The motion explained the "mark and avoid" designation is a practice of "shunning" former members that is based on The Way’s interpretation of the Bible. In a similar complaint, another court concluded that the practice of shunning is protected by the First Amendment and dismissed the complaint.

The Allens operate a site on the Internet called WayDale that offers "insider information" about officials of The Way.

Judge John D. Schmitt indicated in a ruling that he would rule on the motion without a hearing unless an objection is filed. Trial in the lawsuit is planned for Nov. 8.