Coverage and Liability Issues in Sexual Misconduct Claims

PENNSYLVANIAOtherThe Pennsylvania courts have rendered mixed decisions as to whetheran employee’s sexual assault is outside the scope of the employmentfor purposes of respondeat superior liability. See Sanchez v.Montanez, 645 A.2d 383 (Pa. 1994) (Sexual assault of child outsidescope of employment);R. A. v. First Church of Christ, 748 A.2d 692(Pa. Super. 2000); Cf. Nardella v. Dattilo, 1997 WL 1056878 (Pa.March 21, 1997) (Priest’s sexual affair with an adult parishioner hewas counseling was arguably within the scope of employment so as todefeat a motion to dismiss).The disclosure of relevant, non-privileged documents to an adversaryin civil litigation does not constitute a threat of governmentalinterference with the free exercise of religion and therefore does notviolate the First Amendment. Hutchison v. Luddy, 606 A.2d 905 (Pa.Super. 1992).– 57 –