Wife of ousted Upper South Carolina Episcopal Cathedral Dean sues for distress, defamation

The wife of ousted Trinity Episcopal Cathedral Dean Philip C. Linder has filed suit against the cathedral and the bishop of the Episcopal Diocese of Upper South Carolina, claiming she was victimized by both when her husband was suspended abruptly in July 2010 and forced to resign from the historic downtown congregation.

Ellen Cooper Linder alleges in the civil lawsuit filed Thursday in Richland County that Bishop W. Andrew Waldo intentionally inflicted emotional distress and defamed her when Waldo, at the behest of the vestry, set in motion the series of events that led to her husband’s resignation.

Ellen Linder, who lost her part-time position as parish nurse and her standing in the 4,400-member congregation, seeks a jury trial and unspecified damages. Mount Pleasant attorney Larry Richter is representing her.

Read it all.

print

Posted in * Anglican - Episcopal, * Christian Life / Church Life, * Culture-Watch, * South Carolina, Episcopal Church (TEC), Law & Legal Issues, Parish Ministry, TEC Bishops, TEC Conflicts, TEC Parishes

17 comments on “Wife of ousted Upper South Carolina Episcopal Cathedral Dean sues for distress, defamation

  1. palmettopastor says:

    a quote my clergy wife: “You go girl.”

  2. David Keller says:

    It is too bad this story hit on the same day as the DSC story. In reading the story I doubt she has much of a case, but it will be interesting. Waldo is a nice guy but not too bright though a lawsuit like this will be very hard to prove and will waste lots of time and treasure. The one thing all of the hierarchy of TEC has in common is they waste God’s precious resources on suing each other. I am glad I will be totally out of the madness of TEC very soon.

  3. sophy0075 says:

    #2 David,

    She might not have much of a case, but then, TEC has none against the faithful. In any event, it will waste TEC resources to defend against this and may distract some of their horde of attorneys.

  4. Undergroundpewster says:

    Bizzare.

  5. Bookworm(God keep Snarkster) says:

    It’s hard to know whether or not this rises to the level of a successful lawsuit, but it all certainly reeks and makes for bad press, possibly on both fronts.

    “Waldo accused Ellen Linder of violating that directive almost immediately as the couple, on vacation in Mount Pleasant, called friends and confidantes to find out why the dean was being summoned to the bishop’s office.

    While Waldo claimed at the time the directive was crucial to the mediation process, Ellen Linder said it had the effect of isolating and silencing her and her husband”.

    The bishop has “directive”, or direction, over his clergy, but not over their spouses. I’ve said before that I believe that a dumb can of worms to open, and the only “punitive” things the bishop could do to discipline(right or wrong; probably wrong) a spouse is excommunicate her/him or temporarily suspend the administration of the Host to her/him; which looks an awful lot like fearful or vindictive overkill; or, he could ask the interim dean to fire her from her parish position. That can be a sticky wicket tug-of-war or game of “chicken”, as it’s not good karma to continue working in the same place your husband is getting run out of. Hence my own reason for disliking spouses and clergy working in the same setting, but that’s just me–nepotism, real, accidental or implied is to be avoided at all costs. Would that more churches and clergy couples “get that”, but many don’t.

    The above does have the effect of “isolating and silencing her and her husband”; it’s “bad politics”, one-sided, and petty but probably not “illegal” in any way; save for the fact that it should apply much more to the priest than the spouse.

    If there are confidentiality clauses that apply during mediation processes, that directive should come from lawyers, not bishops; especially in the case of the spouse.

    “In court documents, she alleges neither she nor her husband were allowed to defend themselves and were excluded from four meetings conducted by the bishop for Trinity members”.

    Yeah, sad and unfair but that’s usually the way it works.

    “Since her husband’s ouster, Ellen Linder alleges she has suffered migraine headaches, been diagnosed with anxiety and suffered panic attacks”.

    In such situations, it can be better to assume a posture of “never let them see you sweat”.

    “In an email exchange between church member and attorney Lyles Glenn and Belser, Glenn detailed criticisms of Linder and suggested paths to rein in the dean or clear a way for possible resignation: “From Phil’s perspective, a graceful out, appearing to be on his terms, using his greatest weakness (material personal benefit and ego) as the leveraging tool, and from Trinity’s perspective, a graceful out, appearing to be on Phil’s terms, and the knowledge that we can now move ahead without the continuing rancor,” Glenn wrote.

    Glenn also noted, according to the email exhibit within the lawsuit, that there was “one very valuable tool in the bag” — the $100,000 house loan the Linders carried, which the cathedral would apparently forgive if he resigned. The lawsuit alleges the cathedral has yet to satisfy the mortgage”.

    That usually translates to a fat severance package, which would be fair for an 11-year Dean unless he was guilty of misconduct of some description(the defrock-able kind). If the mortgage payoff was part of the package and has yet to be fulfilled, unless that timetable was outlined(ie, by payments, etc.) this could get interesting.

    There are always two sides to these things. Prayers for all concerned…

  6. NoVA Scout says:

    I can’t imagine that the courts would have much truck with this kind of thing. It’s very odd.

  7. Bishops Wife says:

    You know, petty though this may seem, I personally welcome this and hope it gets lots of press. The toll this kind of thing takes on families is immense and my prayers are with this gal. Regardless of what kind of a Dean her husband is or was, HER BIshop had no right to inhibit her in any way from speaking to whom ever she wanted. Wisdom may have dictated that she keep her mouth shut but when somebody is watchng her husband be crucified, it’s hard to be quiet. This whole mess stinks to high heaven and I don’t know a thing about what really happened – and actually, that doesn’t matter. When are we as a church going to start CARING about how we treat our clergy wives and children? Three grown kids who attend the parish? and they were denied attendance at the parish meeting? Who does this Bishop and these parishioners think they are? I say people who object to the treatment of this FAMILY charge Waldo with poor pastoral skills and conduct unbecoming a Bishop. Let the Title IV committee chew on that for a while. On so many levels TEC has become a horrible place. South Carolina should rejoice – being thrown out of TEC is an honor. If Mrs. Linder wants testimony to how TEC treats its clergy wives, she can contact me. I’m dying to testify! I also have the name of someone who can sew her mouth shut temporarily – as I often have cause to do!
    Nara Dewar Duncan and boy, do I wish I had her courage!

  8. John Boyland says:

    I still think that if we want people to take 1 Cor 6:9-11 seriously, that we have to take 1 Cor 6:1-8 seriously. No good can come from using secular lawsuits to settle Church disputes. It just leads to scandal.

  9. David Keller says:

    #7–What John B. said. How does any of what you said possibly justify a frivilous law suit; or for that matter even a meritoriuos law suit? BTW–it may be out of your zone of understanding, but clergy trash lay people a lot more often than it happens the other way around. I have vowed to speak no more of my personal situation, but I have a better law suit than Ellen Linder ever dreamed about–but I would never even consider such a thing. And what about her husband’s bad jugment? You say you know little about the situation, but you should. Bp. Henderson protected Linder while there were lots of upset people at Trinity. The guy should have been looking for a job the day Dorsey announced his retirement. Instead, he let himself be nominated for Bishop by petition and got trounced. Waldo came in and cleaned house–OMG what a shock. Intentional infliction of emotional distress? Maybe she should sue the Dean instead Waldo. The best thing for all of us is to give up all our “stuff” to Jesus and move on. I can assure it works much better than any other remedy, legal or otherwise.

  10. Sarah says:

    Word out to David Keller!

    As little as I want to say nice things about Bishop Waldo, everything I know of it says that he made the right decision. My hope is that he and whoever deals with any of the legal stuff at Trinity won’t do what it’s [i]rather obvious[/i] to outside observers is wanted — which is [i]settle[/i]. Don’t do it, folks — let it go all the way.

  11. Bookworm(God keep Snarkster) says:

    “…clergy trash lay people a lot more often than it happens the other way around”.

    Do you have an actual statistic or reference that you wish to quote on that score?

    Most of the time it’s wrong for clergy to trash lay people, especially in any sort of public setting. That may be emotionally and spiritually disturbing to such, but the difference is that it will not usually cost you your job and livelihood, especially when there may be innocent dependent children in the picture. True, that statement may not apply to lay people who are EMPLOYED by their church or rector. Sadly, one can work for a psycho anyplace, sacred or secular.

    It is true that there are priests out there who should not be in their positions. But I have also seen excellent priests removed by this sort of thing, through the use of no better “evidence” than lies, gossip, innuendo, and false accusations. And, what a bummer–no way in hell can you send an entire parish for a psych evaluation, even though some may need it. When the “relationship” breaks down, the casualty is usually the rector. And one can only hope that the separation is fair and amicable, but that’s usually not the case.

    This might not go very far because it most likely revolves around “damages”–what are those? Luckily the dean did secure another position, albeit not one like he had. If it is true, and in writing, that part of the separation agreement was to pay off the Linders’ mortgage, and that has not happened under a specific timetable, then there could be a case–BUT, I don’t know what settlement anyone would get out of that other than the court orders the diocese/bishop to fulfill the written agreement.

    It’s also awkward and bizarre as all get-out to be starting a new life in a new parish and in a new diocese, but having a lawsuit pending against your former bishop and diocese.

    My point here is that I wish there were better ways of doing this. Most of them I’ve seen to date reek to high heaven, on either side.

    Encouraging “no settlement” would be an ABSOLUTE WASTE of money and legal resources. And again, it all may hinge on what was in the separation agreement.

    You go, Nara, you’re entitled to your opinion. 🙂 I could still beat you with a wet noodle for not accepting your fee for singing at my wedding. If we can meet again, we owe you a fancy dinner, at least. 🙂

  12. Bookworm(God keep Snarkster) says:

    Just FYI, too, any laity out there, in Upper SC or otherwise, who think they can do better are invited to espouse the ordination process as aspirants.

  13. Sarah says:

    RE: “Encouraging “no settlement” would be an ABSOLUTE WASTE of money and legal resources.”

    Not at all — not only would it entail doing justice — since there is an actual right and wrong on this issue — but it would save lots of dollars when others who decide they want money see that it doesn’t work to file frivolous lawsuits.

    The good insurance companies for physicians refuse to settle on frivolous claims and hopefully the same thing will happen with Upper SC.

    I do agree that it’s good that this gets a lot of press — but not for the same reasons that #7 does. ; > )

    All of this will be nicely googleable for future parishes and clergy and bishops. And people will be able to draw their own conclusions about it.

  14. Bookworm(God keep Snarkster) says:

    “Not at all—not only would it entail doing justice—since there is an actual right and wrong on this issue—but it would save lots of dollars when others who decide they want money see that it doesn’t work to file frivolous lawsuits”.

    When have you ever seen a protracted, drawn-out legal process that “saves lots of dollars”?

    Depending on their written separation agreement, those who file “frivolous lawsuits” may be entitled to money that they have not received.

    And it’s not always about money. My father once had to file a lawsuit to get money he was owed. He didn’t need the money. I asked him why he was getting involved in all of it and he said, “I don’t care if I have to spend $30,000.00 to get 10 cents. It’s the principle of the thing”. He won the lawsuit. And he didn’t need the 10 cents, but the other party who filed with him did, and she was happy to get it.

    Maybe God will fix it all someday–possibly in the form of churches without priests. The laity can run their own show. 🙂

  15. Bookworm(God keep Snarkster) says:

    John 15:18-27

  16. Sarah says:

    RE: “When have you ever seen a protracted, drawn-out legal process that “saves lots of dollars”?”

    It happens quite often — since it often avoids *future* frivolous lawsuits.

    Don’t settle, Trinity Cathedral!!!!

  17. Bookworm(God keep Snarkster) says:

    Settling does tend to keep EVERYBODY’S dirty laundry out of the newspaper.

    Note to +episcopal self: If I’m going to issue largely inappropriate and un-enforceable directives to a clergy spouse, and then trash him/her in a print medium or otherwise, I’d better get her to sign(obviously, fat chance) a liability release, too.