Today's Edition Local Missouri National World Opinion Obits Sports GoMidMo Events Classifieds Newsletters Contests Special Sections Jobs
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
story.lead_photo.caption FILE - In this Jan. 8, 2016 file photo, Pennsylvania Supreme Court Justice Christine Donohue addresses those gathered at her swearing in ceremony in Pittsburgh. Pennsylvania's high court on Wednesday, July 21, 2021 dealt a blow to victims of child sexual abuse, throwing out a lawsuit by a woman whose lower court legal victory had given hope to others with similarly outdated claims who'd sued in the wake of a landmark report that documented decades of child molestation within the Catholic church in Pennsylvania. (AP Photo/Keith Srakocic, File)

HARRISBURG, Pa. (AP) — Pennsylvania's high court on Wednesday dealt a blow to victims of child sexual abuse, throwing out a lawsuit by a woman whose lower court legal victory had given hope to others with similarly outdated claims who'd sued in the wake of a landmark report that documented decades of child molestation within the Catholic church in Pennsylvania.

The 5-2 decision ended plaintiff Renee Rice's legal effort to recover damages from the Roman Catholic Diocese of Altoona-Johnstown for allegedly covering up and facilitating sexual abuse she said had been inflicted on her by a priest in the late 1970s.

Rice sued in 2016, but the court majority said that was too late under the Pennsylvania statute of limitations.

A Superior Court panel in 2019 had ruled there were enough facts to let a jury decide if Rice had been prevented from learning about the alleged cover-up of her abuse.

As a child, Rice had been brought in to clean the living space of her alleged attacker, Rev. Charles F. Bodziak, and was a church organist. Bodziak has denied the allegations.

The Supreme Court majority said the two-year statute of limitations began to run when Rice was last assaulted by Bodziak, purportedly in 1981, although it may have expired in 1987, when she turned 20. Rice did not pursue her claims until a 2016 grand jury report into abuse in the diocese.

"We need not resolve the issue as it is clear the statute of limitations expired decades ago," wrote Justice Christine Donohue for the majority.

Donohue said that whether "courthouse doors should be opened for suits based on underlying conduct that occurred long ago is an exercise in line drawing that includes difficult policy determinations" and that courts are "ill-equipped to make that call."

Rice's lawyer, Alan Perer, said the high court's decision ends his client's lawsuit.

"Once a child knows they've been assaulted by a priest, it puts them on notice that they should have suspected and investigated whether or not the diocese was aware of this priest conduct, concealed it, hid it from the parishioners, including the plaintiff," Perer said.

The diocese's lawyer, Eric Anderson, hailed the decision.

"They're going to apply the statute of limitations the way it should be applied in Pennsylvania," Anderson said. "It's been the law, established law, for a long period of time. There's nothing unique or different about this case."

The lower court ruling on Rice's side had generated a slew of new cases filed within two years of a landmark August 2018 grand jury report that detailed the sordid history of hundreds of abusive priests across the state over seven decades.

Anderson and Perer both said those cases are probably not going to succeed, given the new decision.

COMMENTS - It looks like you're using Internet Explorer, which isn't compatible with our commenting system. You can join the discussion by using another browser, like Firefox or Google Chrome.
It looks like you're using Microsoft Edge. Our commenting system is more compatible with Firefox and Google Chrome.
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
/** **/