Within the past few days, two state Supreme Courts have ruled in cases claiming church liability growing out of sexual abuse. In both, the church prevailed. But the two cases were factually rather different from each other.
Holly Berry v. Watchtower Bible and Tract Society of New York, decided by the New Hampshire Supreme Court on July 15, involved a claim by two girls against church officials who failed to report to authorities that their father was sexually and physically abusing them after the girls' mother reported the abuse to church elders. The court held that the state’s child abuse reporting statute does not give rise to a private right of action. Plaintiffs also claimed that the congregation had a common law duty to protect them because of a fiduciary or special relationship, since Jehovahs Witnesses are taught not to report problems to secular authorities. But the majority found no facts present to establish a special relationship here. Nor were there special circumstances created by the elders that enhanced the risk of abuse.
A dissent argued that a duty was created based on special circumstances. It also rejected the claim that investigation into claims of negligent counseling would violate the Free Exercise or Establishment Clause of the First Amendment. The case was discussed in today's Concord Monitor.
John Doe 67C v. Archdiocese of Milwaukee, decided July 13 by the Supreme Court of Wisconsin, involved claims of negligence, fiduciary fraud and breach of fiduciary duty growing out of sexual abuse of plaintiff by a priest when he was a child. The Supreme Court upheld the dismissal of the claim because there had been no allegations that the Archdiocese knew or should have known that the priest was a child abuser during the relevant years.
A concurring opinion rejects Establishment Clause “excessive entanglement” objections to plaintiff’s claims, and finds that the “discovery rule” prevents the claims from being barred by the statute of limitations.
