Hadnot v. Shaw

1 Six issues are presented by this appeal: [1] Did the trial court correctly exclude from consideration the plaintiffs (nonmovants) notice of filing exhibits as a sanction for their noncompliance with summary judgment procedure? [2] Did the plaintiffs timely raise the issue whether summary judgment was premature? [3] Did the plaintiffs show any material fact issue? [4] Did the trial court err in ruling out all of the plaintiffs theories of liability fairly comprised within the evidentiary materials before it? [5] Is summary judgment for the defendants inconsistent with the teachings of Guinn v. Church of Christ of Collinsville? and [6] Did the Churchs First Amendment protection bar the plaintiffs quest for discovery? We answer the first issue in the affirmative and the second through fifth in the negative. As to the final issue, because the trial court failed to rule on the plaintiffs final discovery quest, we are unable to determine whether they sought discovery of post-expulsion conduct not protected by the shield of the First Amendment - i.e., post-expulsion conduct that may be unrelated to implementation of the excommunication sanction.