From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Richelle L. v. Roman Catholic Archbishop

California Court of Appeals, First District, Second Division
Mar 17, 2003
No. A096763 (Cal. Ct. App. Mar. 17, 2003)

Opinion


Page 53a

107 Cal.App.4th 53a ___Cal.Rptr.2d___ RICHELLE L., Plaintiff and Appellant, v. ROMAN CATHOLIC ARCHBISHOP OF SAN FRANCISCO et al., Defendants and Respondents. A096763 California Court of Appeal, First District, Second Division March 17, 2003

[Modification of opinion (106 Cal.App.4th 257; 130 Cal.Rptr.2d 601).]

OPINION

THE COURT.

It is ordered that the opinion filed herein on February 14, 2003, be modified as follows:

Opinion on page 24, the second full paragraph, second sentence [106 Cal.App.4th 282, advance report, line 7], commencing with "Without that fiduciary claim" and ending with a citation to Torcaso v. Watkins, is modified to read as follows:

Without that fiduciary claim, appellant would be left with no more than a claim for seduction, which is statutorily barred, or a claim that the sacerdotal celibacy mandated by the Roman Catholic Church (Code of Canon Law (1983) Canon 277) is judicially enforceable, which is constitutionally untenable. (Torcaso v. Watkins (1961) 367 U.S. 488, 495 [81 S.Ct. 1680, 1683-1684, 6 L.Ed.2d 982].)

There is no change in the judgment.


Summaries of

Richelle L. v. Roman Catholic Archbishop

California Court of Appeals, First District, Second Division
Mar 17, 2003
No. A096763 (Cal. Ct. App. Mar. 17, 2003)
Case details for

Richelle L. v. Roman Catholic Archbishop

Case Details

Full title:RICHELLE L., Plaintiff and Appellant, v. ROMAN CATHOLIC ARCHBISHOP OF SAN…

Court:California Court of Appeals, First District, Second Division

Date published: Mar 17, 2003

Citations

No. A096763 (Cal. Ct. App. Mar. 17, 2003)