This brief argues that the plaintiff has not presented any genuine issues of material fact that could overturn the summary judgment granted to the defendants. It addresses each element of the claims of negligence, respondeat superior, negligent hiring and negligent supervision, arguing the plaintiff has not shown the defendants' actions were unreasonable or that they had knowledge of any issues regarding Rooks prior to hiring him. It also argues that allowing the case to proceed to trial could infringe on the church's First Amendment rights of religious freedom.
This brief argues that the plaintiff has not presented any genuine issues of material fact that could overturn the summary judgment granted to the defendants. It addresses each element of the claims of negligence, respondeat superior, negligent hiring and negligent supervision, arguing the plaintiff has not shown the defendants' actions were unreasonable or that they had knowledge of any issues regarding Rooks prior to hiring him. It also argues that allowing the case to proceed to trial could infringe on the church's First Amendment rights of religious freedom.