Kentucky judge refuses to seal church sex-abuse lawsuits

By The Associated Press

07.13.02

Printer-friendly page

LOUISVILLE, Ky. — A Jefferson County Circuit judge ruled yesterday that more than 100 lawsuits claiming sexual abuse within the Roman Catholic Church would remain open despite efforts by the Archdiocese of Louisville to seal the documents.

Circuit Judge James M. Shake's ruling came two weeks after oral arguments were heard in Jefferson Circuit Court from attorneys for the archdiocese, the plaintiffs, the commonwealth's attorney's office and a newspaper.

"This result is the right result for the right reasons," said William McMurry, the attorney for nearly all of the 154 plaintiffs who have filed suit against the Archdiocese of Louisville. "When I first read this statute, contemplating its action to my clients’ lawsuits, it was clear to me that it had nothing to do with my clients. It clearly only applies to lawsuits against the abusers."

Lawyers for the archdiocese filed a motion in May asking the court to seal the 154 lawsuits. The plaintiffs claim they were sexually abused by clergy members or church employees when they were children. The plaintiffs claim church officials were aware of the abuse but did nothing about it.

The archdiocese filed the motion citing a 1998 state statute that says documents involving sexual abuse with a minor must be sealed by the court if the complaint is made more than five years after the abuse occurred. Most of the recent cases involve alleged abuse occurring more than 30 years ago.

In the days following the archdiocese's motion, attorneys for the plaintiffs, the commonwealth's attorney's office and The Courier-Journal filed motions to keep the documents open. Attorneys said the statute was unconstitutional.

Shake did not rule on the constitutionality of the law. Instead, he said the language of the statute clearly shows that it was only intended for lawsuits naming the perpetrator as a defendant. The ruling said the statute is "inapplicable to the archdiocese." Therefore, a ruling on the constitutionality of the law was not warranted.

The suits filed since April 19 name the archdiocese and Archbishop Thomas C. Kelly as defendants. The names of the priests who allegedly abused the defendants are named in the documents but are not named as defendants.

Ed Stopher, attorney for the archdiocese, argued that church officials did not want priests named publicly until they were proven guilty of a crime. Of the more than 20 men who have been named, only one priest has been indicted. The Rev. Louis E. Miller, who has been named in 63 of the lawsuits, was indicted June 26 on 42 felony counts of sexual misconduct. He has pleaded innocent.

McMurry said he believed Shake would rule to keep the documents open.

"It is always wise to side with the attorney general in matters of a statute's applicability," McMurry said. "And the position we took in this case was consistent with the Attorney General and Supreme Courts' opinions in Rhode Island, Colorado and California."

McMurry cited cases from those three states during oral arguments on June 27.

Jon Fleischaker, attorney for The Courier-Journal, agreed with the court's decision.

"Obviously we are pleased, that's the right decision," Fleischaker said yesterday.

The archdiocese could appeal the decision. A message left by the Associated Press with the archdiocese's attorney, Ed Stopher, was not immediately returned.

McMurry said yesterday's ruling would allow the lawsuits to continue.

"From here, we go to the light of day," McMurry said. "Everything the archdiocese does applying to these cases will be under public scrutiny. Everything that occurs within the courts will be for all to see like it has been in this country for 200 years."

Related

Kentucky appeals judge seals records in church sex-abuse case
Ruling pre-empts decision by lower court judge who had indicated she would unseal files.  07.26.02

State appeals court: Church-abuse lawsuit should be made public
Three-judge panel says Kentucky diocese didn't show there was a compelling public interest to keep some material in case secret.  08.12.02