## Facts

- A 17-year-old church member attended overnight youth activities at her church while her parents were out of town.
- During the event, the youth minister and others concluded that “demons” were present and organized prayer and ritual activity to expel them, including anointing areas with holy oil.
- During subsequent services, church members performed “laying on of hands” and prayed over the minor; she collapsed during prayer.
- The minor alleged church members physically restrained her against her will while praying over her, causing scrapes and bruises and contributing to later psychological symptoms.
- Psychologists attributed her nightmares and related symptoms to traumatic stress associated with the demon-related activities and the alleged restraint.
- The minor and her parents sued the church, ministers, and individual members for torts including false imprisonment and assault, seeking damages that included pain and suffering and emotional injury.
- A jury found for the plaintiff on false imprisonment and assault and awarded damages, including for pain and suffering.
- The court of appeals largely affirmed, rejecting the church’s constitutional defense and concluding the church was barred by judicial estoppel from asserting First Amendment protections.

## Issues

1. Whether the church was judicially estopped from asserting First Amendment defenses based on positions taken in earlier proceedings.
2. Whether, as tried, the plaintiff’s tort claims seeking emotional-injury damages from demon-expulsion activities and “laying on of hands” were non-justiciable because adjudication would entangle the court in religious doctrine and practice.

## Decision

- The Texas Supreme Court held the church was not judicially estopped from raising its First Amendment defense.
- The Court concluded that, as tried, the claims sought recovery for emotional injuries intertwined with religious beliefs and practices, making the dispute ecclesiastical and non-justiciable.
- The Court reversed the court of appeals’ judgment and dismissed the case.

## Legal Principles

- Civil courts may not decide disputes that require evaluating religious doctrine, the truth or falsity of religious beliefs, or the propriety of religious practices.
- Tort liability for emotional injuries alleged to result from religiously motivated practices is barred when determining causation or wrongfulness would require doctrinal inquiry and would entangle the court in ecclesiastical matters.
- First Amendment protections do not necessarily bar claims for plainly secular, tangible physical injuries; however, when emotional-injury damages are inseparable from religious context as tried, dismissal may be required.
- Judicial estoppel applies only when a party clearly takes an inconsistent position; maintaining a consistent distinction between bodily injury claims and constitutionally barred emotional-injury claims does not trigger estoppel.

## Conclusion

The Texas Supreme Court rejected judicial estoppel and held that adjudicating emotional-injury damages arising from the church’s demon-expulsion practices and “laying on of hands,” as presented at trial, would impermissibly entangle the judiciary in ecclesiastical matters; it therefore reversed and dismissed the action.


Pleasant Glade Assembly of God v. Schubert, 264 S.W.3d 1 (Tex. 2008)