Coverage and Liability Issues in Sexual Misconduct Claims

LOUISIANAThe doctrine of “contra non valentem” suspends the running ofprescription where the cause of action is not known or reasonablydiscoverable by the claimant or where the defendant prevents theclaimant from filing suit. See Wimberly v. Gatch, 635 So.2d 206(La. 1994) (Parents’ failure to discover neighbor’s abuse of theirfive-year old son was the direct result of the defendant’s conduct,thus suspending the running of the prescriptive period until the sondisclosed the abuse); Cf. J.A.G. v. Schmaltz, 682 So. 2d 331 (La.App. 1996) (Claimant did not prove that he repressed, suppressed oravoided all memory of the alleged abuse); Doe v Ainsworth, 540 So.2d425 (La. App. 1989) (Claimant was aware of the experiences and theirperverse nature and therefore prescriptive period was not tolled).Reporting LawsOtherLa. Rev. Stat. Ann. Children’s Code Arts. 603 et seq.The Louisiana courts have rendered mixed decisions on vicariousliability for sexual conduct. See Sanborn v. Methodist BehavioralResources, 866 So.2d 299 (La. App. 2004) (Sexual assault of client bysubstance abuse counselor was not within the scope of employment);Rambo v. Webster Parish School Board, 745 So. 2d 770 (La. App.2000) (Janitor’s sexual assault of eight-year-old student was not withincourse and scope of employment); Baumeister v. Plunkett, 673 So.2d994 (La. 1996) (Hospital not vicariously liable for employee sexualbattery); Aaron v. New Orleans Riverwalk Association, 580 So.2d 1119(La. App. 1991) (Employer not vicariously liable for rape of employeeby perpetrators who obtained access with aid of co-employees); Cf.Harrington v. The Louisiana State Board Of Elementary, 714 So. 2d845 (La. App. 1998) (Found rape was in course of teacher / studentrelationship); Latullas v. State of Louisiana, 658 So.2d 800 (La. App.1995) (State liable for prison guard’s rape of inmate); Doe v. TheRoman Catholic Church For The Archdiocese of New Orleans, 615So.2d 410 (La. Ct. App. 1993) (Jury could have reasonably found thatChurch Youth Organization leader’s molestation of 14-year-old waswithin course and scope of his duties); Samuels v. Southern BaptistHospital, 594 So.2d 571 (La. App. 1992) (Hospital vicariously liable forhospital assistant’s sexual assault of patient).A claim for clergy malpractice stemming from a priest’s disclosureof claimant’s past experiences of sexual abuse by his father failedbecause of First Amendment. Lann v. Davis, 793 So.2d 463 (La.App. 2001); See also Roppolo v. Moore, 644 So. 2d 206 (La. Ct. App.1995); Glass v. The First United Pentacostal Church of Deridder, 676So. 2d 724 (La. App. 1996) (Defamation and intentional infliction ofemotional distress claims against church and minister were barred byFirst Amendment)– 27 –