Charges fly in suit over Catholic Diocese settlementBy Adam Parker (Contact)
The Post and Courier
Thursday, June 26, 2008
Gregg Meyers 
Diane Goodstein Previous storiesDiocese faces lawsuit over settlement -- 3.16.2008 Abuse group visits Charleston Diocese -- 10.27.2007 Local diocese to pay $12M -- 8.21.2007 A class-action settlement hashed out between victims of sexual abuse and the Catholic Diocese of Charleston over the course of three years has prompted more acrimony and lawsuits, even after the diocese has distributed $10.3 million to class victims and their attorneys. The ongoing fallout is delaying payment to a group of victims who struck a separate deal. Charleston attorney Gregg Meyers, who negotiated the separate settlement with the diocese for seven clients who opted out of the class, is accusing the church of delaying payment of $1.375 million and colluding with class counsel and Diane Goodstein, the circuit court judge in Dorchester County who presided over the class-action case. "Apparently all counsel were colluding to move settled cases to Dorchester County to get the cases to Judge Goodstein, or to get them away from any judge who might preside in Charleston County," Meyers stated in the suit. Goodstein was out of the country on vacation and not reachable, according to her assistant. Larry Richter and David Haller, attorneys for the class action, issued a joint affidavit Tuesday rejecting the charges. "The idea that either of us colluded with the Diocese of Charleston, Peter Shahid, or Judge Diane Goodstein is beyond preposterous; it is delusional," the affidavit stated, citing acrimonious negotiations among the parties. Several of Meyers' clients are waiting for settlement funds to relieve them of serious financial difficulties, Meyers said. The diocese maintains that it cannot pay them until all claims are resolved, especially because Meyers is now asking for more than the agreed-upon sum and has added a plaintiff. "We are happy to abide by the original agreement," said diocese spokesman Steve Gajdosik. "The money is there, but we cannot pay it with this pending action." Meyers said he informed the diocese that any delay would cause additional harm, not that he demanded more money or new terms. He contends that collusion among the parties likely ensured "approval from the court at expense of the clients, (a large) attorney fee, and a small amount of recovery for class members." Working with Greenville attorney David Flowers, he filed his suit on June 18 to prevent a change of venue for his case, from Charleston County to Dorchester County, where Goodstein would preside. In the Charleston County Court of Common Pleas on Tuesday, Flowers argued that the separate Aug. 30 settlement agreement between the diocese and Meyers' clients could not be considered part of the class action because the plaintiffs had opted out of the larger case, and because the diocese, though it planned to use money left over from the class action to pay Meyers' clients, was obligated to pay them no matter what. A. Peter Shahid Jr., a lawyer representing the diocese, said the case belonged in Dorchester County because it was part of very complex legal proceedings that would best be adjudicated there. Judge John C. Few denied the diocese's request for a change of venue but added that he was in no position to decide whether Meyers' claims were part of the class action. Only Goodstein could determine that, he said, ordering a stay of 60 days to give diocese attorneys time to file any requests in Dorchester County. If Goodstein should deem the two cases related, it could open a can of worms, Flowers said. Class counsel and the diocese never informed members of the class that a separate deal had been negotiated with Meyers' clients, Flowers said. This could suggest that their obligation to represent the interests of the class was not fulfilled, Flowers said. Few noted that there did appear to be some overlap. Separately on Monday, Flowers filed a friend of the court brief in Dorchester County in which he alleged collusion between class counsel, Goodstein and the diocese, questionable actions on the part of the diocese, a conflict of interest concerning Richter's affiliation with the Catholic Church even as he represents clients in a case against the church, excessive legal fees and mishandling of the case on the part of Goodstein. The brief recommended that Goodstein recuse herself; that other eligible victims have a chance to join the class; that Goodstein, Richter, Haller and Shahid report themselves to the Office of Disciplinary Counsel for unethical practices; that any unpaid money from the settlement pool be set aside; and that class counsel forfeit the $2.5 million fee until an independent analysis is performed and "a more reasonable fee awarded." Richter said he chose Dorchester County because of its proximity, reputation for efficiency and relatively uncluttered docket of cases. He knew the settlement case would likely proceed quickly there and that its rural location might appeal to the diocese, he said. Haller said the good-faith estimate of hours spent on the case was determined with the help of a computer program that scanned all the files related to the settlement and estimated time spent on each activity. The dated entries, many of which list more than 24 hours of work, represent the entire time spent on a given project, not time spent that day, he said. As allegations are flung back and forth, Larry Mullen waits. Mullen, now 60 and one of those in Meyers' settlement with the church, said he was a victim of abuse in the late 1950s and early 1960s at the hands of a teacher in the diocese. He wants a quick resolution to the pending case, he said, but what he wants most is for the diocese to admit its mistakes. "They don't ever accept responsibility," he said. Reach Adam Parker at 937-5902 or aparker@postand courier.com. |
Article tools |
|
Notice about comments: Charleston.net is pleased to offer readers the ability to comment on stories. We expect our readers to engage in lively, yet civil discourse. Charleston.net does not edit user submitted statements and we cannot promise that readers will not occasionally find offensive or inaccurate comments posted in the comments area. Responsibility for the statements posted lies with the person submitting the comment, not charleston.net. If you find a comment that is objectionable, please click "suggest removal" and we will review it for possible removal. Please be reminded, however, that in accordance with our Terms of Use and federal law, we are under no obligation to remove any third party comments posted on our website. Full terms and conditions can be read here. |
Comments
This article has 41 comment(s)
Posted by Mayor on June 26, 2008 at 5 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Meyer's clients were in serious financial problems when they jumped on this windfall.
Posted by kingchris on June 26, 2008 at 7:01 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Class action suits aside, I would hope they get their due.
As for Judge Goodstein, she is bar far one of the most honorable and fair judges in the circuit court system. We in Dorchester county are blessed to have her sit on the bench.
Posted by wpc3iop on June 26, 2008 at 7:08 a.m. (Suggest removal)
The church needs to pay up...I'm sure the lawyers involved need the money!
Posted by greyrider on June 26, 2008 at 8:14 a.m. (Suggest removal)
As a parent, I've never understood this. If one of my children were molested by anyone, I can't even imagine having the conversation with a lawyer of going after money. (I'd want to bring back chain gangs) What would you do with the money? If you or one of your children were genuinely molested, you got a check, and say, bought a car, you would be reminded of the molesting everytime you got in the car. I bring this up because while many young people were victimized, so were a lot of priests. A number of journalists (not exactly friends of the Catholic Church) have all concluded that approximately 50% of all allegations were completely made up. This is what makes the whole situation so confusing for the courts. You obviously want to get justice for real victims, but you also don't want an innocent priest to have to carry this ugly stigma around for something he didn't do.
Posted by drp7773 on June 26, 2008 at 8:43 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Lets see he was molested back in 1950 and 1960, can he prove it or is it just his word.......class action means the lawyers get most of the money and most people do not even have to prove that it happened to them. money money money lets see how many come out of the woods on this one.
Posted by greyrider on June 26, 2008 at 8:49 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Also, the sick irony is that when the "Church" is forced to pay in these cases, the priests walks away unpunished. And what many don't realize is that all of the Catholic Church's "excess money" goes to feeding the poor. Worldwide, the Catholic Church spends more money feeding the poor than all of the governments of all countries combined. So when they have to make these payments, that money is pulled from starving kids in Africa or wherever. It just doesn't make any sense. Throw the priests in jail. Punish them. If the case involves a dead priest, why punish someone else? Hear me, it is NOT the Church's job to punish its own priests for a crime. If a bank teller molests a child, do you call the police or the bank president? The bishops are not professionally trained law enforcement officials. That's the real reason why the Church has done such a poor job handling this. They don't know what they're doing. They're clueless. They're not cops.
Posted by commonsence on June 26, 2008 at 9:08 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Meyers has a pair accusing a state judge of collusion. Sounds a bit paranoid to me. I agree with wpc...this has become more about the attorneys and their greed than any justice at this point.
Posted by RTC on June 26, 2008 at 9:23 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Mullen, now 60 and one of those in Meyers' settlement with the church, said he was a victim of abuse in the late 1950s and early 1960s at the hands of a teacher in the diocese.
Oh please.... How many more are going to jump on the train? Many of these are not even close to being recent cases.
I'm willing to bet that a few more people are going to get into financial difficulties and say, "Hey, wait! I was abused back in 1958, and I want to be financially compensated for my abuse."
Posted by Tammie on June 26, 2008 at 9:26 a.m. (Suggest removal)
There is no amount of money in the world that could ever compensate me or my child(ren) if their innocence is lost at the hands of anyone.
Posted by RTC on June 26, 2008 at 10:05 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Well said, Tammie.
Posted by steve on June 26, 2008 at 10:06 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Survivor of child sexual abuse here; not by a clergy member.
I find too many comments on this article callous.
A survivor of child sexual abuse will spend thousands of dollars in therapy to heal such deep wounds.
As to RTC's thoughts: I bet it sure would have been easy for a young man in the 50's to admit to being abused.
Public Service Announcement: Go to Darkness To Light's web site: d2l.org and take their Stewards of Children training. Then re-evaluate some of the accusations bandied about on this subject.
Posted by Thomas1776 on June 26, 2008 at 10:06 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Diane Goodstein. What a joke.
Posted by Thomas1776 on June 26, 2008 at 10:09 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Tammie is one of those greedy slimes who will lie to win.
Posted by Tammie on June 26, 2008 at 10:10 a.m. (Suggest removal)
And Thomas you are a stalker who follows me in every blog I speak on and comment in.
Posted by Thomas1776 on June 26, 2008 at 10:15 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Diane Goodstein (Attorney Arnold Goodstein's wife) failed to make it out of last years Judicial Merit Selection Committee screening process for a slot on the SC Supreme Court. State Rep. Annette Young had previously guaranteed her colleagues that Goodstein would emerge from the crowded field of would-be Supremes. Hmmmmmmmm?
Posted by Thomas1776 on June 26, 2008 at 10:17 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Tammie is a wacko and delusional nutcase. Lets all pray she get help.
She has more issues than National Geographic!
Posted by bigwhip on June 26, 2008 at 10:19 a.m. (Suggest removal)
RTC - you speak unknowingly.Do you know any of these victims? Do you know any of the perpetrators? I do and know that it took a ton of guts and soul searching agony to come forward when the suspected was arrested. Only when these victims came forward was the case solved. I know a few of these victims and can tell you they are good and productive citizens. As for this squabble among the lawyers...what else would you expect.
Posted by RTC on June 26, 2008 at 10:22 a.m. (Suggest removal)
steve, I didn't mean to sound callous. I am sure back then no one would have ever believed a child that was being abused. People had a tendency to hush those types of things up. Child abuse infuriates me. I just hate to see people falsely claiming that they were abused for monetary gain, when there are so many out there who are truly suffering.
I just finished a book on children that kill.
After reading how horribly some children were sexually abused, I can now understand how they can grow up to be so damaged.
I hope that you have been able to heal from your past and are not still suffering.
Posted by Tammie on June 26, 2008 at 10:24 a.m. (Suggest removal)
I have issues Thomas, yet YOU go out of your way to have a comment about what I say and a few other posters on here? I'm sorry that it bothers you so very, very much that I dont think you half as much of the time you spend thinking of me, I don't know you and don't care to. Please don't speak to me, as I have you on ignore after this post. Good day.
Posted by Girleygirl on June 26, 2008 at 10:26 a.m. (Suggest removal)
The church needs to settle this real quick and fast and move forward with the healing process. Do not delay this anymore.
Posted by RTC on June 26, 2008 at 10:30 a.m. (Suggest removal)
bigwhip, hopefully I explained myself when I answered to steve's comment.
I have been doing extensive reading on this subject, and I want to understand all that I can about these situations.
I have taken the Darkness to Light classes.
My point was simply that I hate to see anyone falsely claim abuse. My heart goes out to all of those that are survivors of sexual abuse. I do take this matter seriously, or else I would not have botherd to take those classes.
Posted by greyrider on June 26, 2008 at 10:43 a.m. (Suggest removal)
It is BECAUSE I understand how serious this is that false claims bother me so much. I would rather be falsely accused of murder than to be falsely accused of being a child molester. I can't imagine walking the streets after someone falsely accused me of this. Also, imagine being a bishop and having someone walk in your office and accuse a priest of this. You've dealt with so many false claims, what do you do? You don't want to blow off this person. What if they're telling the truth? But what if the priest is innocent? Please, if you are truly a victim, hear me. PLEASE GO TO THE POLICE. The bishops are not trained nor prepared to handle this. It's not their job.
Posted by ColdBeer on June 26, 2008 at 11:18 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Darkness to Light uses scare tactics and misrepresents statistics in order to line the wallets of the organizers. The cause is just, but the organization is not.
I would love to see ALL child molesters, even those protected by the pope, be put to death. Unfortunately, our Supreme Court views these crimes differently.
I would also like to see people come forward with the accusations in a timelier manner. It would make catching and prosecuting the dirt bags so much easier.
I would also like to see Diane Goodstein get a new make-up artist and a new photographer. That picture is just plain hideous. I'm reminded of Batman's "Joker".
Posted by steve on June 26, 2008 at 12:15 p.m. (Suggest removal)
RTC: Thank you. I am a survivor no longer a victim and speak first hand when I state that it takes thousands of dollars in therapy to make that transformation.
ColdBeer: Darkness To Light's "Stewards of Children" child sexual abuse prevention program was awarded the 2007 "Best Prevention Programs" by the National Crime Prevention Council (ya know McGruff the Crime Dog.) As to you assertion "Scare tactics in order to line wallets..." I am one of the creators of Stewards of Children. Your comments are untrue and biased. 'Nuff said.
As to "I would also like to see people come forward with the accusations in a timelier manner. It would make catching and prosecuting the dirt bags so much easier."
A majority of perpetrators are family members, close friends of a family, coaches, teachers, adults in positions of authority, elder teenagers and so forth. Try re-thinking your position by acknowledging that, as adults, it is our job to prevent, recognize and react responsibly in regard to this epidemic. To add the responsibility of "coming forward in a timely manner" to a child, or teenager, who has been abused is asking a bit much.
I do totally agree with you about Diane's photo.
Posted by Mayor on June 26, 2008 at 12:47 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I went to Catholic shool and Jesuit High School from 59-71.
If any priest ever touched one of us we'd have kicked his cassock to the altar. I'm sure there are valid cases, minimal, but most are BS.
If you kept quiet after the abuse, you need to be abused again. You are a moron.
Posted by grannyofsix on June 26, 2008 at 1:35 p.m. (Suggest removal)
One of the reason people stop believing in churches and God is this reason. Because some do keep quiet about what was done back in the fifties and sixties because adults would rather believe the kid was lying for some reason, maybe mad at the PRIEST or NUN then believes that a PRIEST or NUN would ever do such a thing. If you did tell your parents or someone else YOU would get a very bad spanking as they called it back then. So, Mayor I have to disagree here some people aren’t morons they just were Scared and would rather keep quite. You would be surprised how many people won’t say a word even today.
Posted by forget on June 26, 2008 at 1:50 p.m. (Suggest removal)
There should be a statute of limitations on this type of thing. I'm Catholic, went to Catholic churches, and schools and had never seen nor heard of this stuff until recent years. I'm sure some of it went on, as well as other religions, alot of it sounds like rubbish or stuff put into their heads by psychiatrists. Nobody is making $$$ on this but lawyers. As is always the case with class action situations.
Posted by ColdBeer on June 26, 2008 at 1:58 p.m. (Suggest removal)
steve,
Calling yourself a "creator" of the information disseminated by Darkness to Light or its Stewards of Children program is a bit of a stretch. A better term would be "assembler". The information has been available from many different sources (one of them being common sense) for a number of years. Darkness to Light "assembled" information already available to the public, put it in training programs, brochures, posters and booklets. They then charge a fee to take the training and charge money to order the literature. If Darkness to Light had a true interest in preventing child abuse, the literature would be free. Why take donations for your charity and then turn around and charge for the services (and I use that term lightly) that it provides?
The statistics put forth by Darkness to Light are outrageous and, in no place that I can find, substantiated. Being one of the “creators” associated with Darkness to Light, can you explain their source for the statistics?
Do you realize that when you compare the program expenses for Darkness to Light with other charities, Darkness to Light does better than barely 30% of ALL charities in the United States? That number includes the fly-by-night charity rip-offs all over the place. By program expenses, I mean the amount of money that actually ends up going to the cause for which it was collected. In Darkness to Light’s case, even that number is suspect. When they print literature for later sale, they include that in “program expenses”.
Go to http://www.charitynavigator.org/ and check on Darkness to Light. Compare it to something like the American Red Cross.
I stand by my statement that Darkness to Light’s main purpose is to line the wallets of those running the organization. I stand by my statement that they use poor statistic and scare tactics to collect donations from the misinformed.
Don’t get me wrong. I am not belittling the need to stop child abuse. Preventing child abuse should be a top priority in everyone’s mind. I would just prefer that it be championed by someone that actually has the best interest of the children in mind.
Posted by grannyofsix on June 26, 2008 at 2:23 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I just got an email stating I should either proof read or use a spell check sorry about my bad spelling and not using punctuations in the right places but I am sure you all understood my post.
Posted by im4usc on June 26, 2008 at 2:40 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Myself and my 2 brothers all attended Catholic schools. My brothers were altar boys in the 50's and 60's; my own son has been an altar boy for 6 years and attends a Catholic school. Never one iota of impropriety by a priest. Absolutely none.
Although I'm sure some of the abuse cases are true, my belief is that a lot of them are not.
I'd trust my son's life with the priests I've been in contact with, and find it sad that they have to constantly be in fear of false accusations.
I can't imagine how hard it must be to wear the collar these days.
Posted by greyrider on June 26, 2008 at 2:51 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Statistically, Catholic priests rank near the bottom as far as having the lowest percentage of their profession having ever been convicted of child molestation. As a group, they are among the greatest people on earth. Don't let the few (very few) scumbags distort your view of the priesthood.
Posted by ptmama73 on June 26, 2008 at 3:05 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I was raised in the Catholic Church and I was not abused nor did I witness any abuse. I am not saying it did not happen, I don't doubt SOME did. But, playing devil's advocate here, waiting anywhere from 30 to 50 years to come forward to make a complaint and then not through law enforcement? That seems a little excessive and leads me to suspect that the claim is not valid.
Unfortunately, when you jump on a class action lawsuit the only ones getting any serious money are the lawyers - the victims just get a pittance. Just look at the cigarette, prescription drug, and asbestos class actions...
I agree with ColdBeer, PREVENTING child abuse should be priority one.
Posted by ColdBeer on June 26, 2008 at 3:09 p.m. (Suggest removal)
greyrider, my view of priest hasn't been distorted by the allegations. Just like any other group, they are a cross section of society. Most good, some bad. I am, however, very disappointed in the catholic church's response (or lack there of) to the problem. The pope is real quick to jump on the "no condoms" band wagon, and yet when it comes to his priests abusing children.. he doesn't say much or do anything.
Posted by greyrider on June 26, 2008 at 3:26 p.m. (Suggest removal)
ColdBeer, I agree, but I don't expect much from the Church. They are not law enforcement officials. What can they do? If a priest is not convicted in a court of law, he's innocent. Can you imagine the outrage if the Catholic Church built a prison in Boston and started jailing priests and/or church employees bypassing the American court system?
Posted by steve on June 26, 2008 at 3:30 p.m. (Suggest removal)
ColdBeer,
Assembler is fine by me. I sorted through over 95 hours of survivors footage. My pocket is not lined.
This August will be the third year of their Prevent-a-thon in association with WCIV. There will be over 30 locations that will have free trainings in Stewards of Children, in the Charleston area. They are also allocating over $100k to train teachers in SC this upcoming year.
Non-profits need products to sell. Darkness to Light has taken the time to develop and test such a product. 501(c)3 organizations can not live on donations alone.
Sources Link from Darkness to Lights web site:
http://d2l.org/KnowAbout/statistics_refe...
"I would just prefer that it be championed by someone that actually has the best interest of the children in mind." I really take offense at this statement. Who in hell are you to make such a sweeping generality?
Question: What's your real beef with the organization?
Posted by ColdBeer on June 26, 2008 at 3:33 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I stated my real beef. It's still there should you wish to re-read it.
Posted by steve on June 26, 2008 at 4:27 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Where's the 2007 #'s?
Posted by ColdBeer on June 26, 2008 at 4:49 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I was wondering the same thing. They have 2007 #'s for other charities, but not for all. I didn't read through the whole site to see how they got there numbers. Maybe they are waiting on the charities to submit info?
I don't know you steve, and I don't know that you are "lining your pockets". I wasn’t attacking you and my comments were not directed at you personally. The cause that Darkness to Light has taken on is a VERY noble cause and for that reason I am sure that there are MANY good people with good intentions involved. I also feel sure that there are some, most likely at the top, that are in it more as a career (lining their pockets) than as a cause. When a group uses misleading statistics and the doomsday commercials it always makes me suspicious and I do some research. Their performance through 2005, as a non-profit charity, was lacking, to say the least. There are other organizations, fighting the same cause, that perform much better when you look at where the money goes.
Posted by Thomas1776 on June 26, 2008 at 5:42 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Tammie .. never gone out of my way for belligerent wackos like you that use multiple names to post under. Check your history. BTW .. this is not yahoo chat.
Posted by mlm on June 26, 2008 at 8:29 p.m. (Suggest removal)
This phrase particularly got my attention which I thought had been attributed to Gregg Meyers, as much it belonged to his co-counsel David Flowers. It's ironic that Gregg Meyers finds fault with Larry Richter, an attorney for the other plaintiffs in this case. He's supposed to be on the same side for crying out loud, yet he's demonstrating his willingness to trample on the other victims so he can get paid more. Gregg Meyers has a lot of nerve to accuse Larry Richter of having "a conflict of interest concerning [his] affiliation with the Catholic Church even as he [Richter] represents clients in a case against the church..."
Maybe someone should suggest that Meyers recuse himself from now on when matters concerning Buist Academy, James Island Charter High School, Charleston Progressive and District 20's complaints come before the county school board. His contempt for those who support fair access to these schools is well known. Some might say he's too personally involved since he's been a Buist parent from the beginning and is currently an AMHS parent. What does Meyers say about those who continue to suffer from his abuse of his position in determining the fate of our failing schools? What about those who have been cheated by the downtown public schools as Gregg Meyers protects the cheaters? Is Meyers to be believed when he says that Memminger will be staffed just like Buist? He lied and the Post and Courier hangs on his every word.
In a manner of speaking, Meyers has in his own way abused the hell out of a lot of downtown kids with his self serving performance as a county school board member. His public statements concerning this case show that his primary focus is on his fee and he cares very little about the hypocricy of his argument.
Gregg Meyers brought this into the spotlight of public discussion all by himself. He must know that this argument could be used against him. Meyers must also know that sauce for the goose is also sauce for the gander.
I feel for his clients. They suffer as their attorney inflates his ego at their expense.
Posted by steve on June 27, 2008 at 6:47 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Thank you ColdBeer. Thank you for the link. Thank you for your last post. I totally agree about the years and #'s associated. I found it educational that many of the organizations that do the same thing have a broader focus and seem to be a majority of religious associated off shoots.
I agree about the scare tactics in D2L's older commercials. But the statistic of 1 in 4 girls and 1 in 6 boys being sexually abused before their 18th birthday is a national reality. 1 in 5 children will be sexually approached on the internet.
We are living in what would be called an epidemic. Just look at the headlines. Every day another case of abuse is reported. The staff a DSS is troubled by the amount of young girls who are bearing children from these rapes. The FBI has a whole division dedicated to investigating online predators.
Adult education is key to prevention here.
I do believe that 2005 is the year that Stewards of Children was developed, so that would account for the imbalance in some of D2L's numbers. I have no idea what kind of salary anyone is bringing in. I do know that if you would like to take the training for free you can do so in August.
Just take the training then let's continue this discussion.