Dolan Calls Child Victims Act "Unjust" To Church

[happyslug]

23. So age 23 is NOT good enough, what should be the cut off?

The actual proposed law:
http://open.nysenate.gov/legislation/bill/A5488-2011

In most states the Statute of Limitations for Civil Actions is generally Four years, in New York State it appears to be Five years. Given that the Statute of Limitations does NOT start to run till a Child turns 18, that means that a Victim can sue till he or she turns 23 years of age at the present time. The debate should this be extended to age 28?

The problems with extending the Statute of Limitations for such Civil Suits are immense. Remember, most Child abuse occur within families (Something like 90%) do we extend the statute of limitation in such cases to 10 years after the child turns 18? and will Lawyers take such cases were it is hard to collect on any judgement entered against such family member?

Yes, no one is denying the rights of someone age up to 23, to file a lawsuits, that is the present law. The issue is how far beyound 22 should the law permit someone to wait before filing a lawsuit? Remember the Statute of Limitation only starts to run when the child turns 18, even if it incurred 18 years before. Thus a victim must file a lawsuit by the time he turns 23.

Please note We are NOT talking of CRIMINAL actions, but Civil Actions, i.e. lawsuits. The Act does extent Criminal Statute of Limitation to forever, but that is NOT an issue. No one wants to protect the person who actually did the crime, the issue is when should that person's supervisors be held for the actions of the prepetrators?

The Bishop makes a point, while the perpetrators are named in such lawsuits, no one is looking at them for payment, the Church is being ask to PAY for these acts, even while the perpetrators walks free. How is that Justice?? Now, technically the Church is being held for its failure to control its own employee on its own property (There is a Pennsylvania Case where a then 12 to 14 years agree to met a priest at a Motel, the court ruled that was OUTSIDE the employer-Employee relationship and struck down the judgement against the Catholic Church) but how long can a victim be permitted to sue such employers for the actions of their employees?

Please note, if the organization was a Public School, the Public School is NOT liable for the act of the perpetrators at all, even if they do MORE then what any of the Catholic Bishops did. Why? Sovereign Immunity. You can NOT sue the State for the Actions of its Agents WITHOUT permission of the State. Thus if a School Board covers up for a Teacher (And there have been a lot of such cases) when the cover up is found out, the only person the Victim can sue is the Teacher, maybe the principal but NOT the School. Worse if the Teacher and/or Principal is married, it becomes almost impossible to collect on such Judgement do to the fact you can NOT take marital property for the debt of one spouse. i.e in such lawsuits no one is looking at the perpetrators to pay up, they are looking at the perpetrators' employer to pay up on the legal grounds that a employer is liable for the acts of an employee when such acts are done as part of the employee's employment by the employer.

The reason we have NOT heard of similar problems in the Public School System is lawyers will NOT take such cases. Lawyers want paid, and if you sue a Public School system for some cover up you will LOSE against the School, you may win against the teacher and maybe even the Principal, but NOT against the School. Given that most such principals and teacher either do NOT have much money OR are married, it becomes almost impossible to collect on such judgments, thus most lawyers will take them.

The reason we hear of the lawsuits against the Catholic Church is lawyers will take such cases for Judgement against the Catholic Church are permitted AND the Church has assets to pay such Judgments (unlike the lawsuits against day care centers that were popular in the early 1990s. very popular for a few years till the Lawyers found out such Daycare centers had no assets and thus no way to pay the Judgments).

Would it NOT be "FAIR" to permit such lawsuits against Public School where similar incidents occurred? It is NOT even being suggested for the State knows it will have to foot the bill for such lawsuits and does NOT want to pay.

This brings me to the Center of this debate, Where do we draw the line as to WHEN someone can sue in a pedophile case? Furthermore should ANY AND ALL employers of such employees be liable i.e. permit people to collect from Public Schools? The State will gladly extend the Statute of Limitations for the State knows it will NOT have to pay (For it is NOT paying now) but should it? and should the State also permit recovery from School Boards that permit such actions? A debate that is NOT occurring for no one wants they taxes to go up to pay for such actions in the Public School System (I would go into the move to private Schools to replace public schools, but that move is to new for such cases to hit the parents let alone the papers).