In a notable legal ruling, a New Mexico bankruptcy judge, David Thuma, dismissed a clergy sex abuse claimant’s motion against the Archdiocese of Santa Fe. This ruling, delivered earlier this summer, may set a precedent for future church bankruptcy cases, particularly concerning the enforcement of reorganization plans and settlement agreements. Thuma’s decision highlighted the complexities and potential pitfalls associated with ambiguous language in legal covenants.
Key Legal Dispute Over Non-Monetary Covenant
The dispute centered around a non-monetary covenant in the archdiocese’s bankruptcy reorganization plan, which allegedly required the inclusion of accused clergy on a public list. The claimant, Mela LaJeunesse, argued that the Archdiocese failed to add the name of a deceased priest, Fr. Richard Spellman, to its list of credibly accused clergy despite the evidence provided. The Archdiocese, however, argued that such additions required a review by their Independent Review Board (IRB), which did not find sufficient grounds to list Spellman.
Judge’s Interpretation and Legal Implications
Judge Thuma sided with the Archdiocese, ruling that LaJeunesse did not have the legal standing to enforce the covenant. He also agreed with the Archdiocese’s interpretation of the covenant, though he acknowledged its ambiguous wording. Thuma’s decision reminds us of the importance of precise language in legal agreements and the challenges involved in their enforcement. The ruling also leaves unresolved questions about the handling of additional clergy names mentioned in abuse claims.
Source:
Questions on abuse claims remain after bankruptcy judge rules against survivor
Image: Flickr
About Post Author
