| About Us
| Products |
VATICAN-LAWSUIT (UPDATED) Aug-10-2010 (930 words) xxxn
Vatican welcomes US plaintiffs' decision to end abuse lawsuit
By Carol Glatz
Catholic News Service
VATICAN CITY (CNS) -- While underlining its condemnation of "the horror" of the sexual abuse of minors by clergy, the Vatican welcomed as "good news" the imminent end of a lawsuit against the Holy See in a U.S. court.
The Vatican spokesman, Jesuit Father Federico Lombardi, told journalists Aug. 10 that "the Holy See is satisfied to hear the news" that a lawsuit in a U.S. court against the Vatican was being dropped by the plaintiffs.
Three men in Louisville, Ky., filed a motion Aug. 9 requesting a federal judge drop their case.
The men, who were abused by priests in the Archdiocese of Louisville, filed a suit against the Vatican in 2004 claiming it was liable for actions by bishops in failing to prevent sexual abuse by priests. They argued that the bishops who supervised the abusive priests were employees of the Holy See.
However, the men's attorney, William F. McMurry, told media outlets that because an earlier court ruling recognized the Vatican's sovereign immunity, he was going to drop the lawsuit. A judge must now rule whether the case can be dismissed, but lawyers for both sides told The Associated Press it had virtually ended.
The Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act protects governments from being hauled into U.S. courts. The law previously has been found to apply to efforts to sue the Holy See, exempting it from tort claims.
In June, the U.S. Supreme Court left standing a lower court ruling that will allow an Oregon man to try to hold the Vatican financially responsible for his sexual abuse by a priest, if he can persuade the court that the priest was an employee of the Holy See.
By declining to take Holy See v. John Doe, the court left intact the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruling that said because of the way Oregon law defines employment, the Vatican is not protected under the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act from potential liability for the actions of a priest who Doe, the unidentified plaintiff, said sexually abused him in the 1960s.
The case will now go back to U.S. District Court, where Doe's attorneys will attempt to prove that the late Andrew Ronan, a former Servite priest who was laicized in 1966, was a Vatican employee at the time the events took place.
Jeffrey Lena, the U.S.-based attorney for the Holy See, said in a statement Aug. 10 that the Kentucky case does not change the legal situation in Oregon.
The Oregon and Kentucky cases are similar "insofar as the sole remaining jurisdictional issue in both cases is whether the Holy See is an "employer" under the tort exception to the foreign sovereign immunities act," Lena said. "But in the Kentucky case, the question was whether the bishop was an employee. In the Oregon case, the question is whether the priest himself is an employee of the Holy See."
In the Kentucky case, said Lena, "the plaintiffs' attorneys knew full well that the Vatican was not involved because they had been able to examine all the documents from the diocese years ago. Those documents show no Vatican involvement, no exercise of control and no evidence of employment of bishops by the Holy See."
"This development confirms that, contrary to what the plaintiffs' lawyers repeatedly told the media, there has never been a Holy See policy requiring concealment of child sexual abuse," he said.
"The theory crafted by the plaintiffs' lawyers six years ago misled the American public," he said.
"That the case against the Holy See always lacked merit does not mean that the plaintiffs themselves did not suffer as a result of sexual abuse," said Lena. "But bringing this case only distracted from the important goal of protecting children from harm."
Father Lombardi said despite the good news of the case's almost certain dismissal, the Vatican in no way was "minimizing the horror and the condemnation of sexual abuse and compassion for the victims' suffering."
"Justice toward victims and the protection of minors must be goals that remain a priority," he said.
"Nevertheless, it is positive that a six-year-long case alleging the Holy See was involved in charges of covering-up abuse -- (charges) which also had a strong negative impact on public opinion -- has in the end been shown to be grounded on a baseless accusation," he said.
In the dismissal motion, McMurry wrote that an earlier court ruling recognizing Vatican immunity meant the plaintiffs then had to proceed on the argument that U.S. bishops were officials or employees of the Holy See.
However, "the grant of jurisdiction was so narrow that it's meaningless," he said.
Also, the claim of one of the plaintiffs was voided because he was involved in a settlement against the Louisville Archdiocese in 2003 and, therefore, could not seek a claim from the Vatican.
The motion said that in the other two plaintiffs' cases, "the bishops in question are deceased and further discovery regarding the bishops' actions is believed to be impossible."
Lena said the case illustrates "the difference between allegations and evidence. Six years ago, the plaintiffs' lawyers concocted a series of allegations. But they never had the evidence to back those allegations up. And that is the real reason plaintiffs now wish to dismiss their own case."
A lawsuit still on the books in Wisconsin states that top Vatican officials knew about allegations of sexual abuse by Father Lawrence Murphy at St. John's School for the Deaf near Milwaukee. But in an earlier statement, Lena said the Vatican "knew nothing of his crimes until decades after the abuse occurred."
Copyright (c) 2010 Catholic News Service/USCCB. All rights reserved.
This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or otherwise distributed.
CNS · 3211 Fourth St NE · Washington DC 20017 · 202.541.3250