p. “(extlink)Lawrence Lessig”:http://lessig.org/blog/ is representing John Hardwicke in a lawsuit against their common alma mater the American Boychoir School in Princeton. As reported in the “(extlink)Star Ledger”:http://www.nj.com/search/index.ssf?/base/news-1/106870652649440.xml?starledger?ntr :
bq. “This is a school that institutionalized sex abuse,” Lessig said. He urged three appeals court judges to strip the school of the immunity that shields it from a lawsuit by another alumnus, John Hardwicke. Vineland lawyer Jay Greenblatt, who represents the school, argued that it is protected by the state’s 45-year-old Charitable Immunity Act. He urged the appeals court to uphold a ruling by Superior Court Judge Jack Sabatino in Mercer County dismissing Hardwicke’s lawsuit. The appeals court, as usual, reserved decision. Its ruling could affect all charities in New Jersey, including the Catholic Church.[1]
p. This law, intended to protect schools and other non-profits has been the subject of controversy.
bq. Patricia Serrano, whose son Mark was molested by a former Mendham priest who has since been defrocked, said: “Nonprofit institutions in New Jersey, like the Catholic Church, have exploited the New Jersey Charitable Immunity Act to avoid responsibility and accountability after harboring child rapists in their organizations.” Steven Goodell, a Princeton lawyer who represents the Catholic Diocese of Trenton, said later that the church has settled sexual abuse lawsuits that it could have defended on the basis of charitable immunity.[2]
p. The argument seems to revolve around the extent of the law and its possible abuses. Lessig, who is more famous for his work on revising copyright in the digital/internet age and the “(extlink)Creative Commons”:http://www.creativecommons.org project, stated that allowing conduct which was “extensive, pervasive, institutionalized” and protect;ing the institution aboslutely regardless of the conduct of its employees risks creating a haven for sex offenders in NJ. On the other hand, many institutions have a legitimate concern that no matter how many steps or preventive actions that they take, they could be responsible for millions of dollars due to the judgment of a capricious jury.
p. That (unfortunately) justified fear seems to lie at the root of problems with this (and other laws). Juries have become difficult to predict and trust in their reactions to cases, particularly those involving large and/or corporate entities. The standard of a “reasonable individual” or “honest attempt” seem to have been lost in deliberations affecting everything from sex abuse cases to medical malpractice to hazing and abuse at colleges and in Fraternities. There are no longer clear expectations with regards to what an organization can do that would be considered diligent and reasonable protection. That combined with an increasing trend of suing up and down the food chain, to anyone remotely related in a case based on their assets has produced a difficult environment for anyone to operate in. This seems like to also be somewhat responsible for the noted decrease in suits actually taken to trial[3], which only furthers the pursuit of deep-pocketed parties in the knowledge that they will likely settle to prevent the expense and uncertainty of a trial.
fn1. “(extlink)Star Ledger”:http://www.nj.com/search/index.ssf?/base/news-1/106870652649440.xml?starledger?ntr :
fn2. “(extlink)Star Ledger”:http://www.nj.com/search/index.ssf?/base/news-1/106870652649440.xml?starledger?ntr :
fn3. http://www.nj.com/search/index.ssf?/base/news-11/1068618775119240.xml?starledger?ntop
Lessig in Trial against Charitable Immunity Act
Tags: age · blog · cas · ci · cle · copyright · it · NJ · problem · project · tar · ui · Work · XML
p. “(extlink)Lawrence Lessig”:http://lessig.org/blog/ is representing John Hardwicke in a lawsuit against their common alma mater the American Boychoir School in Princeton. As reported in the “(extlink)Star Ledger”:http://www.nj.com/search/index.ssf?/base/news-1/106870652649440.xml?starledger?ntr :
bq. “This is a school that institutionalized sex abuse,” Lessig said. He urged three appeals court judges to strip the school of the immunity that shields it from a lawsuit by another alumnus, John Hardwicke. Vineland lawyer Jay Greenblatt, who represents the school, argued that it is protected by the state’s 45-year-old Charitable Immunity Act. He urged the appeals court to uphold a ruling by Superior Court Judge Jack Sabatino in Mercer County dismissing Hardwicke’s lawsuit. The appeals court, as usual, reserved decision. Its ruling could affect all charities in New Jersey, including the Catholic Church.[1]
p. This law, intended to protect schools and other non-profits has been the subject of controversy.
bq. Patricia Serrano, whose son Mark was molested by a former Mendham priest who has since been defrocked, said: “Nonprofit institutions in New Jersey, like the Catholic Church, have exploited the New Jersey Charitable Immunity Act to avoid responsibility and accountability after harboring child rapists in their organizations.” Steven Goodell, a Princeton lawyer who represents the Catholic Diocese of Trenton, said later that the church has settled sexual abuse lawsuits that it could have defended on the basis of charitable immunity.[2]
p. The argument seems to revolve around the extent of the law and its possible abuses. Lessig, who is more famous for his work on revising copyright in the digital/internet age and the “(extlink)Creative Commons”:http://www.creativecommons.org project, stated that allowing conduct which was “extensive, pervasive, institutionalized” and protect;ing the institution aboslutely regardless of the conduct of its employees risks creating a haven for sex offenders in NJ. On the other hand, many institutions have a legitimate concern that no matter how many steps or preventive actions that they take, they could be responsible for millions of dollars due to the judgment of a capricious jury.
p. That (unfortunately) justified fear seems to lie at the root of problems with this (and other laws). Juries have become difficult to predict and trust in their reactions to cases, particularly those involving large and/or corporate entities. The standard of a “reasonable individual” or “honest attempt” seem to have been lost in deliberations affecting everything from sex abuse cases to medical malpractice to hazing and abuse at colleges and in Fraternities. There are no longer clear expectations with regards to what an organization can do that would be considered diligent and reasonable protection. That combined with an increasing trend of suing up and down the food chain, to anyone remotely related in a case based on their assets has produced a difficult environment for anyone to operate in. This seems like to also be somewhat responsible for the noted decrease in suits actually taken to trial[3], which only furthers the pursuit of deep-pocketed parties in the knowledge that they will likely settle to prevent the expense and uncertainty of a trial.
fn1. “(extlink)Star Ledger”:http://www.nj.com/search/index.ssf?/base/news-1/106870652649440.xml?starledger?ntr :
fn2. “(extlink)Star Ledger”:http://www.nj.com/search/index.ssf?/base/news-1/106870652649440.xml?starledger?ntr :
fn3. http://www.nj.com/search/index.ssf?/base/news-11/1068618775119240.xml?starledger?ntop