Ave Maria Law School invokes ministerial exception in wrongful termination suit

[Michael R. Masinter]

Why would the assumed right of expressive association preclude  
liability for breach of contract, for fraud, or for tortious  
interference with a contractual relationship?  To be sure Ave Maria  
might regret having chosen to grant tenure to its faculty, but having  
done so, why would a right of expressive association permit it to  
ignore the contractual and tort duties arising from the contract it  
freely entered?  Without conceding the right as applied to the school,  
why would its presumed existence affect any of the claims against  
either the school or the individual defendants?


Michael R. Masinter                      3305 College Avenue
Professor of Law                         Fort Lauderdale, FL 33314
Nova Southeastern University             954.262.6151 (voice)
masinter at nova.edu                        954.262.3835 (fax)


Quoting Rick Duncan <nebraskalawprof at yahoo.com>:

> Even if the ministerial exception doesn't apply, why wouldn't the   
> right of expressive association apply to a school's right to exclude  
>  teachers who are part of its expressive mission? Surely, Ave Maria   
> is at least as much of an expressive association as are the BSA. No?
>
> Rick Duncan
> Welpton Professor of Law
> University of Nebraska College of Law
> Lincoln, NE 68583-0902
>