the claims of fraud for intentional misrepresentation are independent claims based on the Archdiocese's alleged knowledge of the priests' prior sexual molestation of children and the Archdiocese's intent to deceive children and their families. We further conclude that the date of the accrual of the fraud claims is "when the plaintiffs discovered or, in the exercise of reasonable diligence, should have discovered" that the Archdiocese's alleged fraud was a cause of their injuries.Two justices dissenting in part argued that the negligent supervision claims should not have been dismissed either.
Objective coverage of church-state and religious liberty developments, with extensive links to primary sources.
Thursday, July 12, 2007
Wisconsin Supreme Court Rejects Statute of Limitations Argument In Fraud-Abuse Case
In what is described by commentators as a "surprise move" (Orange County Personal Injury Lawyer), yesterday the Wisconsin Supreme Court held that fraud claims against the Catholic Archdiocese of Milwaukee growing out of priest sexual abuse charges may still be able to be brought. In John Doe 1 v. Archdiocese of Milwaukee, (WI Sup. Ct., July 11, 2007), the court affirmed dismissal on statute of limitations grounds of claims that the church had been negligent in supervision of its priests. However it held that