Roman Catholic Bishop v. Superior Court

Caution
1996 Cal. App. LEXIS 158·42 Cal. App. 4th 1556·50 Cal. Rptr. 2d 399·96 Daily Journal DAR 2235·11 I.E.R. Cas. (BNA) 752
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaFebruary 28, 1996D024251California4,168 words

Opinion

Opinion

Huffman, J.

Fifteen-year-old Jane D. (Jane) claims she was sexually abused by her parish priest. Jane sued the church, alleging it negligently hired, retained and supervised the priest because it should have known of his dangerous propensities as a sexual exploiter of children. The church seeks mandamus after it unsuccessfully moved for summary judgment on the ground it had no prior knowledge or reason to know the priest was a risk to engage in a sexual relationship with a minor. We conclude the church established it had neither prior notice of the priest’s unfitness nor a duty in the employment context to investigate the priest’s sexual conduct. Consequently the church was entitled to summary judgment. We grant the petition.

Factual and Procedural Background

Jane, through her guardian ad litem, filed a complaint for damages on October 18, 1994, naming the Roman Catholic Bishop of San Diego, the parish Church of the Most Precious Blood (together the church) and Reverend Emmanuel Omemaga (Omemaga) as defendants. Jane alleged Omemaga was under the direct employ, supervision, agency and control of the church as an associate pastor. His employment duties “included providing for the…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.