2011-00108491-CU-BC

Vanessa Scroggins vs. Catholic Bishop of Sacramento

Nature of Proceeding: Hearing on Demurrer

Filed By: Wisniewski, Ashley M.

Defendant Roman Catholic Bishop of Sacramento’s (“Bishop”) Demurrer to the
Second Amended Complaint is ruled on as follows:

Plaintiff alleges that she was employed by defendant as a teacher and vice-principal at
Our Lady of Grace School. The written agreement attached to the 2AC provides that
either side may terminate the employment without cause if 30 days notice is provided.
Section 6B of the agreement provides that an employee may be terminated “for cause”
at any time, without prior notice. Plaintiff alleges that she was terminated without prior
notice for no good cause.

Plaintiff alleges that she was harassed by principal Josh Rucker who belittled her in
front of others, and when she complained he told her she was “too female, too
emotional, and too touchy.” (SAC page 3, line 1)

She alleges that she was “immediately” terminated without cause in violation of section
6B of the employment agreement. She alleges that she was defamed when, after the
termination, there was a meeting with parents at which the school officials agreed with
a parent’s statement that “the only reason a teacher would be terminated with such
immediacy was if she constituted a danger to students’ physical and/or psychological
health and safety.” (SAC page 4, lines 7-11) She alleges that the statements were
republished within the Our Lady of Grace community and the greater West
Sacramento area in general. She alleges that Rucker and Ho knew that the statement
was not true and that defendant acted “intentionally and maliciously.” 1st cause of action Defamation: Overruled.

The tort of defamation involves: (1) a publication; (2) that is false; (3) defamatory; (4)
unprivileged; and that (5) has a natural tendency to injure or cause special damage. (
Taus v. Loftus (2007) 40 Cal.4th 683, 720.) Words spoken and alleged to be
slanderous must be set out in the complaint so that the defendant has notice of the
particular charge it is required to answer. (Haub v. Friermuth (1905) 1 Cal.App. 556.)

Defendant contents that the common interest privilege is clear on the face of the SAC.
However, the common interest privileged is not an absolute privilege, but a qualified
privilege. Plaintiff has alleged malice, therefore a cause of action is stated under Civil
Code section 47(c) even though the statements were made in the context required for
a conditional privilege.

2nd cause of action Breach of Written Contract: Overruled. A cause of action is
stated for violation of section 6B of the employment agreement.

3rd cause of action Breach of Oral Contract: Sustained with leave to amend for
failure to state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action. The terms of the alleged
oral contract, that her one year employment contract would be automatically renewed
absent cause for non-renewal, appear to be directly contradicted by the integrated
written contract attached to the 2AC, and is barred by the parol evidence rule. The
subject matter of the oral contract (employment or separate vice-principal agreement)
is uncertain.

4th cause of action Breach of the Covenant of Good Faith and Fair Dealing :
Sustained with leave to amend for failure to state facts sufficient to constitute a cause
of action. This claim appears redundant to the breach of written contract claim since
no additional facts are alleged other than those that support the breach of contract
claim.

Answer to remaining counts to be filed and served on or before December 6, 2013.

The minute order is effective immediately. No formal order pursuant to CRC Rule
3.1312 or further notice is required.