Page 1
Lawsuit Seeking Damages From Archdiocese Alleging Abuse by Priest Not a SLAPP—C.A.
By a MetNews Staff Writer
The Court of Appeal for this district yesterday affirmed a Los Angeles Superior Court order denying an anti-SLAPP motion brought by the Roman Catholic Archbishop of Los Angeles and others in an action against them by seven adults who want to hold the church liable for their alleged molestation by a priest while they were children.
The archdiocese argued that the allegation that it is vicariously liable for sexual batteries by Father Christopher Cunningham based on a supposed ratification of his conduct is predicated on its having paid for his defense in civil litigation and in connection with an investigation by the Sheriff’s Department. That, it contended, constitutes speech or litigation conduct, rendering applicable the anti-SLAPP statute, Code of Civil Procedure §425.16.
“We disagree,” Div. Five’s presiding justice, Laurence D. Rubin, said in the majority opinion, declaring:
“[T]the gravamen of the suit against the Archdiocese is not speech—it is the molestation and failure to supervise.”
Specific Allegations
He elaborated:
“In our review of the anti-SLAPP motion we do not ignore 23 pages of specific allegations of, among other things: (1) Father Cunningham’s sexual abuse of plaintiffs; (2) Father Cunningham’s repeated violation of the Archdiocese’s policy to prevent molestation; (3) priests’ and other parish employees’ knowledge of Father Cunningham’s violations of this policy; (4) complaints by parishioners against Father Cunningham; (5) statements acknowledging that Father Cunningham was ‘immature’ — the code for suspicions of molestation; (6) repeated failures to investigate; (7) the disappearance of files containing complaints about Father Cunningham; and (8) the reassignments and promotion of Father Cunningham that allowed the molestation to continue. We find it is this conduct that forms the basis of the allegations against the Archdiocese, not the selected allegations that ratification was also evidenced by the Archdiocese’s defense of Father Cunningham in the [civil] case and the criminal investigation.
“Because the Archdiocese chooses to ignore the bulk of the allegations of the complaint against it, it makes no attempt to argue that these actual allegations are protected activity under the anti-SLAPP law.”
Rubin said the focus must be on the acts of misconduct on the part of Cunningham, not acts of the archdiocese in defending him.
|
|
|
CHRISTOPHER CUNNINGHAM Accused Molester |
Negligence Alleged
The plaintiffs also alleged negligence on the part of the archdiocese. The presiding justice wrote:
“The numerous allegations of nonspeech-related negligent conduct—failure to supervise, negligent retention, failure to investigate—which form the bulk of this cause of action cannot be simply brushed away because the Archdiocese would rather categorize this cause of action as ‘failure to inform.’ ”
He went on to say:
“Even if we agreed that the negligence cause of action was limited to allegations based on a failure to inform plaintiffs of the danger presented by Father Cunningham, we would still conclude the cause of action was not based on protected speech.” A cause of action predicated on a failure to speak, he explained, is not based on speech. Joining in Rubin’s opinion, which affirms an order by then-Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Elizabeth Feffer, was Justice Dorothy Kim. Justice Lamar Baker said he concurs because “that allegations concerning defendants’ facilitation of attorney representation for the allegedly abusive priest are merely collateral.”
The case is Ratcliff v. The Roman Catholic Archbishop of Los Angeles, 2021 S.O.S. 1792
J. Michael Hennigan, Lee W. Potts and Elizabeth S. Lachman of McKool Smith Hennigan represented the archdiocese. Anthony DeMarco teamed with Holly N. Boyer and Shea S. Murphy of Esner, Chang & Boyer in acting for the plaintiffs.
Cunningham was removed from active ministry in 2006 and in 2008 archdiocese listed him on its website as being among the priests with credible sexual misconduct accusations against them. He became a psychologist in Rhode Island, counseling youth. He was arrested in Rhode Island on April 14 and charged with 12 felony counts of lewd and lascivious acts with a child.
Copyright 2021, Metropolitan News Company