Second Trial Will Determine Damages in Sex-Abuse Case Involving Florida Baptist Convention

By Ludmilla Lelis
Orlando Sentinel
July 1, 2012

articles.orlandosentinel.com/2012-07-01/news/os-lk-florida-baptist-sex-abuse-verdict-20120701_1_second-trial-civil-trial-jurors

Florida Department of Corrections mugshot of Douglas W. Myers.

TAVARES — A Lake County man recently won what is likely the first liability claim against the Florida Baptist Convention for a sex-abuse case.

But it will take a second trial to find out if he'll win any compensation for damages suffered when his former minister, Douglas Myers, molested him.

A Lake County jury in May decided that the statewide Baptist group, which comprises nearly 3,000 congregations and 1 million members in Florida, was negligent for approving Myers to start new churches in Lake County.

Myers, now 63, is serving a seven-year prison sentence for molesting the lawsuit plaintiff when he was 13 years old.

The jury agreed with the plaintiff on nearly all the legal issues, including finding that the convention was negligent in selecting and supervising Myers, and finding the convention had a duty to protect the victim from harm.

Jurors found that Myers wasn't actually an employee of the convention but did act as an "agent" of the convention, or appeared to be a representative of the convention, when the abuse occurred.

In August, attorneys in the case will return to court to argue about the verdict.

Defense attorneys for the convention want to throw out the verdict and ask for a new trial, arguing that because jurors agreed with them on one of the questions that the verdict is inconsistent.

Attorneys for the victim want to throw out the part of the verdict in which jurors were asked whether the Lake County Baptist Association and Myers' former church, the Triangle Community Church, share responsibility. Those two organizations are no longer part of the litigation and the plaintiff attorneys argue that the evidence showed the convention was the main group responsible.

Once those legal questions are settled, the case could be scheduled for a second trial on a potential award for damages.

While the case was still in progress, the presiding judge at the time, Circuit Judge William Law, ruled that the trial should be split that way because the question of liability was debatable.

'Unfair' to victim

Splitting a civil trial in this way isn't common, but it makes sense in cases which involve emotional or graphic testimony, Stetson University College of Law professor Lee Coppock said.

"Sometimes the facts that give rise to damages are so ugly the jury will want to find liability because the jurors feel the need to give the plaintiff a substantial award," Coppock said.

However, splitting the case tends to be a bigger benefit to the church or religious organization defending a liability claim, said Jeff Herman, whose Miami law firm, Herman, Mermelstein & Horowitz, has represented dozens of victims of clergy sexual abuse. His firm is not involved in this case.

"It's unfair to the victim," Herman said. "You have to make the victim go through the trial twice because there are so many overlapping issues that you need much of the same evidence during the second trial."

Contact: llelis@tribune.com