A federal court handed Will McRaney’s legal team yet another victory in McRaney’s lawsuit against the North American Mission Board (NAMB) of the Southern Baptist Convention (SBC). NAMB will be forced to produce copies of at least four nondisclosure and non-disparagement agreements to McRaney, according to a federal court ruling handed down Thursday, December 22, 2022.
NAMB did not want to produce separation agreements (what many call Nondisclosure and non-disparagement agreements) and related documents signed by potential witnesses in the case of McRaney v. NAMB. According to NAMB’s claim there are documents that apply to at least four employees who would be or could be witnesses in the case. NAMB claimed the agreements were privileged legal work.
The court rejected NAMB’s efforts to shield the documents from discovery. According to the ruling, “To the extent NAMB believes the identities of the current and former employees who signed these agreements constitute work-product, the court disagrees.”
Here is what NAMB tried to avoid providing: “Any agreement(s) You have entered into with any individual or organization that you believe limits or constrains, in any way, the ability or authority of any such individual or organization to speak, write or comment about Plaintiff, about NAMB, or about this case (including but not limited to any severance agreements, non-disclosure agreements, nondisparagement agreements, or “cooperation agreements”).”
NDAs. For those who pay attention to the Southern Baptist Convention, NDAs are a serious problem used by rogue entities to avoid facing accountability.
Why did NAMB enter into these agreements?
And how could the NDAs influence the way these potential witnesses act?
That was one of the reasons the judge ordered the production of the agreements following an in-camera review.
According to the judge, “The mere existence of these agreements raises the possibility of a potential witness self-censoring testimony and withholding information based on the belief that it is privileged, even without a formal invocation of the privilege. Even if NAMB’s selection of the employees subject to these agreements can be construed as work product, the plaintiff is entitled to know which employees are subject to these agreements. Accordingly, NAMB is ordered to produce the agreements identified in its privilege log under a protective order if they so choose no later than December 30, 2022.”
Why do courts have to reveal truth instead of NAMB and its trustees?
Shouldn’t Christians do things in the light?
Why does the SBC use so many non-disclosure agreements?
What does Kevin Ezell have to hide? Why do NAMB trustees allow it? These aren’t trade secrets for Tesla or Google nor are they nuclear codes.
Again, what does NAMB have to hide?
Here is the order if you want to read all of it: