Religious Pilgrimage Case in Ninth Circuit

[Jim Maule]

Michael MASINTER <masinter at NSU.ACAST.NOVA.EDU> writes

> [The Court of Appeals]
> reversed on the ground that the evidence was insufficient to establish the
> temporal component of her pilgrimage -- though she established a bona fide
> religious belief that she was required to undertake a pilgrimage, she
> failed to offer sufficient evidence to support the trial court finding
> that her bona fide belief required her to travel at that time of year.

Goodness, this looks like someone simply failed to put into evidence
information that ought to be easily obtained, from a source other
than the plaintiff. There must be information from the shrine, the
church, other pilgims and pilgrimage tour operators about the
significance of that time of year (anniversary of date or season that
appearances occurred/person or saint died/was born/did miracle/ etc)
Is there some sort of "you goofed, you lose" rule that trumps the
other issues?

Jim Maule
Professor of Law
Villanova University School of Law
Villanova, PA 19085
maule at law.vill.edu
http://www.cilp.org/~maule
(610) 519 - 7135