Now that Rachel Canning, the 18-year-old high school student who sued her parents after leaving home last October, is back with her folks, you'd think the drama would be over. But no: The Daily Record reports Rachel's lawyer "filed an emergency application Wednesday afternoon to seal records, close the courtroom and have a guardian appointed for the young woman."
Rachel accused her parents of being controlling and abusive (they allegedly harped on her weight, for instance) and said they kicked her out. However, her parents, Sean and Elizabeth Canning, say she refuses to follow by their rules (she's broken curfew repeatedly for alleged drunken partying, she's stolen their money and bullied her sibling) so she ran away to her boyfriend's house and then a friend's house, thereby emancipating herself from their guardianship. The Cannings also said that Rachel was welcome to return home if she followed their rules. Instead, Rachel sued her parents to pay for her high school tuition and college deposit, plus medical fees—and the legal fees that her friend's dad John Inglesino is paying for.
That lawyer, Tanya Helfand, wrote to the judge in the application for a legal guardian:
Just a few days ago Rachel Canning indicated that she could not go back home with her parents and she required a promise of some financial assistance going forward. Now, after speaking with her mother yesterday, she said she is waiving her complaint and is receiving no promises or consideration in return. The court did not determine if she is emancipated or not. A psychologist certified that the parents are abusive. School faculty certified that the parents abused the child....
It is critical that if Rachel does dismiss this matter that it be done of her own free will and not due to the extreme pressure of her parents and the media. Rachel and counsel for Rachel have not once gone to the media with this case. All pressure is from defendant. It is critical that the courtroom be closed and that all parties, including counsel, be enjoined from speaking with media any further to avoid further manipulation of this legal matter.
The judge hearing the case, Judge Peter Bogaard, denied Helfand's request.
Angelo Sarno, attorney for the parents, said, "The case is without any legal merit. Certain cases should not see the inside of a courtroom. This is one such case. Government cannot police the day-to-day financial affairs of parents and their children while the family is intact. The case must be resolved quickly between the parents and child, preferably without involvement of the court and/or legal counsel. The longer this case remains pending, the greater the divide created between parent and child will grow."
He added, "It is the goal of the Cannings to be present at their child’s graduations, her wedding and at the birth of their grandchildren. That will never be a possibility until and unless this matter is brought to a swift and amicable conclusion. If one cannot be reached, it is our intention to move expeditiously for a dismissal of this case on the basis it fails to state a claim for which legal relief can be granted. The Cannings want this matter behind them so they can begin the healing process with their family."
Apparently Elizabeth Canning called Rachel, asking her to come home. (Hopefully nobody's face gets shit on.) The lawsuit is still pending and Judge Bogaard has scheduled another hearing for April 22.
