Brief of Defendants-Appellants Hyun Jin Moon, Jinman Kwak, Youngjun Kim, and Michael Sommer ______
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Nos. 20-CV-714, 20-CV-715 ________________________________________ DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS ________________________________________ Clerk of the Court Received 03/22/2021 02:33 PM HYUN JIN MOON, et al., Defendants-Appellants, v. FAMILY FEDERATION FOR WORLD PEACE AND UNIFICATION INTERNATIONAL, et al., Plaintiffs-Appellees. ________________________________________ Appeal from Superior Court of the District of Columbia, Civil Division—Civil Actions Branch (Case No. 2011 CA 003721B) ________________________________________ BRIEF OF DEFENDANTS-APPELLANTS HYUN JIN MOON, JINMAN KWAK, YOUNGJUN KIM, AND MICHAEL SOMMER ________________________________________ Francis D. Carter (D.C. No. 164376) Michael A. Carvin (D.C. No. 366784)* LAW OFFICE OF FRANCIS D. Jacob M. Roth (D.C. No. 995090)* CARTER William G. Laxton, Jr. (D.C. No. 982688) 101 S Street, N.W. David T. Raimer (D.C. No. 994558) Washington, D.C. 20001 JONES DAY Telephone: (202) 393-4330 51 Louisiana Avenue, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20001 Counsel for Defendants-Appellants Telephone: (202) 879-3939 JinMan Kwak and Youngjun Kim Henry W. Asbill (D.C. No. 938811) Christopher B. Mead (D.C. No. 411598) Veena Viswanatha (D.C. No. 1022442) LONDON & MEAD BUCKLEY LLP 1225 19th Street, N.W., Suite 320 2001 M Street, N.W., Suite 500 Washington, D.C. 20001 Washington, DC.. 20036 Telephone: (202) 331-3334 Telephone: (202) 349-8000 Counsel for Defendant-Appellant Counsel for Defendant-Appellant Michael Sommer Hyun Jin Moon DEFENDANTS-APPELLANTS’ D.C. APP. R. 28(a)(2) STATEMENT: The parties in this action are: The Family Federation for World Peace and Unification International, The Universal Peace Federation, and The Holy Spirit Association for the Unification of World Christianity (Japan) (Plaintiffs-Appellees). Counsel: James A. Bensfield (appellate & trial counsel) Alan I. Horowitz (appellate & trial counsel) Brian A. Hill (appellate & trial counsel) Laura G. Ferguson (appellate & trial counsel) Michael J. Satin (appellate & trial counsel) Dawn E. Murphy-Johnson (appellate & trial counsel) MILLER & CHEVALIER CHARTERED Benjamin P. De Sena (appellate & trial counsel) LAW OFFICES OF DE SENA & PETRO Hyun Jin Moon (Defendant-Appellant). Counsel: Henry W. Asbill (appellate & trial counsel) Veena Viswanatha (appellate & trial counsel) BUCKLEY LLP Michael A. Carvin (appellate counsel) Jacob M. Roth (appellate & trial counsel) William G. Laxton (appellate & trial counsel) David T. Raimer (appellate & trial counsel) JONES DAY Michael Sommer (Defendant-Appellant). Counsel: Christopher B. Mead (appellate & trial counsel) LONDON & MEAD (continued on next page) ii JinMan Kwak (Defendant-Appellant). Counsel: Francis D. Carter (appellate & trial counsel) LAW OFFICE OF FRANCIS D. CARTER Youngjun Kim (Defendant-Appellant). Counsel: Francis D. Carter (appellate & trial counsel) Law Office of Francis D. Carter UCI (Defendant-Appellant). Counsel: Derek L. Shaffer (appellate & trial counsel) William A. Burck (appellate & trial counsel) John F. Bash (appellate counsel) JP Kernisan (appellate & trial counsel) QUINN EMANUEL URQUHART & SULLIVAN, LLP [There are no intervenors or amici curiae in this action.] iii TABLE OF CONTENTS Page INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................. 1 STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION ................................................................................... 2 STATEMENT OF THE ISSUES .......................................................................................... 2 STATEMENT OF THE CASE ............................................................................................. 2 STATEMENT OF FACTS ..................................................................................................... 6 A. Rev. Moon Founds the Unification Church Movement. ........................................ 6 B. In the 1990s, Rev. Moon Announces the “End of the Church Era.” ................... 7 C. Rev. Moon Publicly Proclaims Dr. Moon the “Fourth Adam.” ............................ 8 D. Hak Ja Han, Sean, and Corrupt Clerics Scheme To Usurp Succession. ............... 9 E. The Directors Run UCI To Support Rev. Moon’s Mission. ................................ 12 1. The Directors continue to support peace-building efforts. ................................ 13 2. The Directors modernize and professionalize UCI. ............................................ 16 3. The Directors accomplish Rev. Moon’s life-long dream of executing the Yeouido development project. ............................................................................... 18 F. The Schism Deepens After Rev. Moon’s Passing in 2012. ................................... 21 SUMMARY OF ARGUMENT ............................................................................................ 23 ARGUMENT .......................................................................................................................... 26 I. IN GRANTING SUMMARY JUDGMENT TO PLAINTIFFS, THE SUPERIOR COURT IMPERMISSIBLY RESOLVED RELIGIOUS DISPUTES. ...................................................... 26 A. The First Amendment Forbids Courts from Adjudicating Disputes Over Church Doctrine or Leadership. ............................................................................ 26 iv B. Plaintiffs’ Claims Ultimately Turn on Disputes About the Theology and Leadership of “the Unification Church” Religion. .............................................. 30 C. The Superior Court Misunderstood This Court’s Earlier Decisions. ............... 39 II. EVEN IF PLAINTIFFS’ CLAIMS WERE JUSTICIABLE, THE SUPERIOR COURT ERRED BY GRANTING SUMMARY JUDGMENT ON THIS RECORD............................................ 42 A. A Plaintiff Is Entitled to Summary Judgment Only If No Reasonable Jury Could Reject Its Claim. ............................................................................................ 43 B. The Superior Court Improperly Resolved Material Factual Disputes. ............. 44 III. THE SUPERIOR COURT ALSO VIOLATED THE FIRST AMENDMENT AND D.C. LAW BY REMOVING THE DIRECTORS FROM UCI’S BOARD. ................................................ 50 CONCLUSION ...................................................................................................................... 50 v TABLE OF AUTHORITIES Page(s) CASES Abdul-Azim v. Howard Univ. Hosp., 213 A.3d 99 (D.C. 2019) ................................................................................................... 43 Barry v. Little, 669 A.2d 115 (D.C. 1995) .................................................................................................. 2 *Bd. of Directors, Wash. City Orphan Asylum v. Bd. of Trs., Wash. City Orphan Asylum, 798 A.2d 1068 (D.C. 2002) ....................................................................................... 44, 48 *Beckman v. Farmer, 579 A.2d 618 (D.C. 1990) ......................................................................................... 43, 44 Bible Way Church v. Beards, 680 A.2d 419 (D.C. 1996) ................................................................................................ 26 Blair v. D.C., 190 A.3d 212 (D.C. 2018) .................................................................................................. 6 Byrd v. Blue Ridge Rural Elec. Coop., Inc., 356 U.S. 525 (1958) ........................................................................................................... 47 Cong. Beth Yitzhok v. Briskman, 566 F. Supp. 555 (E.D.N.Y. 1983) .................................................................................. 38 D.C. v. E. Trans-Waste of Md., Inc., 758 A.2d 1 (D.C. 2000) ....................................................................................................... 2 *Family Fed’n for World Peace & Unification Int’l v. Moon, 129 A.3d 234 (D.C. 2015) .......................................................................................... passim Fontenot v. Upjohn Co., 780 F.2d 1190 (5th Cir. 1986) .......................................................................................... 43 vi Gan v. Van Buren St. Methodist Church, 224 A.3d 1205 (D.C. 2020) .............................................................................................. 43 Hines v. Turley, 615 N.E.2d 1251 (Ill. Ct. App. 1993) ............................................................................. 34 Holland v. Hannan, 456 A.2d 807 (D.C. 1983) ................................................................................................ 44 Hosanna-Tabor Evangelical Lutheran Church & Sch. v. EEOC, 565 U.S. 171 (2012) ........................................................................................................... 27 Johnson v. Capital City Mortgage Corp., 723 A.2d 852 (D.C. 1999) ................................................................................................ 40 *Jones v. Wolf, 443 U.S. 595 (1979) ..................................................................................................... passim Kedroff v. St. Nicholas Cathedral of Russian Orthodox Church, 344 U.S. 94 (1952) ............................................................................................................. 28 Liu v. U.S. Bank Nat’l Ass’n, 179 A.3d 871 (D.C. 2018) ......................................................................................... 42, 43 *Meshel v. Ohev Sholom Talmud Torah, 869 A.2d 343 (D.C. 2005) .........................................................................................