SC Supreme Court considers charitable immunity argument in sex abuse case involving Charleston Diocese

COLUMBIA, S.C. (WCBD) — The South Carolina Supreme Court is now reviewing a decision made by a lower court in a child sex abuse case involving the Roman Catholic Diocese of Charleston.

This stems from a lawsuit filed in 2018 when a Charleston man sued the Charleston Diocese, alleging that he was sexually assaulted by two teachers in 1970 while a student at what was then called Sacred Heart Catholic School.

Former Charleston County Circuit Court Judge Bentley Price made a summary judgment in the case — meaning a decision was made without a full trial — in favor of the Diocese under charitable immunity.

Charitable immunity is a legal doctrine that protects charitable organizations from liability, meaning they do not have to pay damages for the conduct of a staff member. However, the state Supreme Court repealed the doctrine in a 1981 ruling on Fitzer v. Greater Greenville YMCA, but the actions in the suit occurred before the 1981 ruling.

The South Carolina Court of Appeals eventually upheld that ruling, but the South Carolina Supreme Court agreed to review the case as requested by the victim. On Dec. 10, attorneys for both sides gave their arguments for and against charitable immunity being upheld in the case.

“In Caughman vs. Columbia YMCA where the court was asked to consider the applicability of the workers comp statutes to charitable entities and they acknowledged that it was well settled in this state that charities are entitled to full immunity from tort liability,” argued Richard Dukes, the attorney representing the Diocese of Charleston.

Both sides shared interpretations of past cases involving charitable immunity and how they believe it sets a precedent for a decision in this case.

“So your viewpoint Mr. Richardson is Jeffcoat [Jeffcoat v. Caine] really is dispositive in this case and if we adhere to Jeffcoat then you prevail and we reverse the court of appeals?” Chief Justice John Kittredge asked Jim Richardson, the attorney representing the victim.

“That’s the whole case, your honor — the whole case,” Richardson replied.

After hearing arguments from both sides, the Supreme Court adjourned. The case is now in the court’s hands for a decision.