## Facts

- After 15 years of marriage, Chani Lightman filed for divorce and sought temporary custody of four children.
- Her husband opposed custody and submitted, under seal, affirmations from two Orthodox rabbis describing communications with Lightman about her religious practices and marital intimacy.
- Rabbi Tzvi Flaum averred that Lightman said she had stopped observing certain religious purification laws and was seeing another man socially.
- Rabbi David Weinberger averred that Lightman said she had stopped religious bathing to avoid sexual relations with her husband and asserted she no longer followed Jewish law despite raising the children Orthodox.
- Lightman sued the rabbis for (1) breach of fiduciary duty based on alleged violation of CPLR 4505 (clergy-penitent privilege), (2) intentional infliction of emotional distress, and (3) defamation (against Weinberger).

## Issues

1. Whether CPLR 4505 imposes a clergy duty of confidentiality enforceable through an implied private civil action for damages based on disclosure of confidential communications.

## Decision

- The Court of Appeals affirmed the Appellate Division’s dismissal of the breach of fiduciary duty claim.
- The court held CPLR 4505 creates only a testimonial/evidentiary privilege and does not authorize a private damages remedy for disclosure.
- The dismissals of the intentional infliction of emotional distress and defamation claims remained intact, leaving no surviving claims.

## Legal Principles

- CPLR 4505 is a rule of testimonial privilege governing compelled disclosure in judicial proceedings; it is not a civil liability statute.
- A statutory evidentiary privilege does not, by itself, imply a private right of action for money damages.
- Under New York’s implied-right-of-action analysis, even if a plaintiff is within the class meant to benefit, a private remedy will not be implied where it would be inconsistent with the statute’s structure and legislative scheme, particularly where the Legislature provided no express civil remedy.

## Conclusion

New York’s highest court concluded that CPLR 4505 functions as an evidentiary bar to compelled clergy testimony and does not create an enforceable fiduciary-duty tort allowing damages for alleged disclosure of confidential spiritual communications.


Lightman v. Flaum, 97 N.Y.2d 128, 761 N.E.2d 1027 (N.Y. 2001)