Philadelphia Archdiocese Heads to Federal Court, by Jamie Smith, CBS 3, September 18, 2006

Philadelphia Archdiocese Heads to Federal Court

By Jamie Smith
CBS 3
September 18, 2006

http://cbs3.com/topstories/local_story_261001558.html

(AP) Philadelphia Plaintiffs who allege that they were sexually abused by priests should not be allowed to sue the archdiocese under federal anti-racketeering laws because the statutes do not cover personal injury, church lawyers argued Monday.

C. Clark Hodgson Jr., attorney for the Archdiocese of Philadelphia, asked a federal court to dismiss a lawsuit brought against the church in June by 13 people who say they were abused by priests.

The lawsuit argues that the archdiocese violated federal conspiracy and anti-racketeering laws by attempting to cover up the abuse. The statutes are most commonly used to prosecute organized crime, and lawyers in other states have been unsuccessful in using the laws in alleged priest abuse cases.

Photo by The CBS 3

But the victims' attorney, Stewart Eisenberg, said Monday that while these are "not the normal, everyday claims," the case should go forward.

The federal suit might be the only way for victims to get redress because state courts -- citing the statute of limitations -- have barred victims from filing personal injury claims, Eisenberg said.

Hodgson, however, argued that anti-racketeering laws are designed "to thwart criminal invasion of legitimate business." Moreover, he said, victims of racketeering must prove damage to business or property because the law does not cover personal injury.

Eisenberg contended that the right to sue for personal injury is a property right, and that was violated by the archdiocese's efforts to cover up priest abuse until it was too late to file such claims.

The two sides also argued over whether the lawsuit should be certified as a class action. Eisenberg is seeking class-action status on behalf of all children who were abused by Philadelphia-area priests dating back to 1940.

District Judge Legrome Davis did not indicate when he might rule.