[Cardinal] Egan to NY Priests: You're On Your Own

National Review Online ^ | 04/29/2002 | Rod Dreher

[Mike Fieschko]

EGAN TO NY PRIESTS: YOU'RE ON YOUR OWN: [Rod Dreher] The meeting between New York's Edward Cardinal Egan and his priests has broken up, and I'm hearing that priests left steaming.

According to Father X., a priest I just talked to, Egan told them that the archdiocese won't pay the legal fees of an accused priest unless the priest is exonerated in court.

What this means is a priest who gets hauled into court on the flimsiest of pretexts will have to hire his own lawyer -- priests, of course, make little money -- and can't hope to get a penny of that back unless he wins. "Does this mean I have to hire the $100-an-hour guy over the $800-an-hour guy?" Father X. told me.

"The general consensus of the priests after this meeting was, 'You're on your own.'"

Fr. X. reports that Egan ducked a question about gay priests ("This is one of the most important questions in this whole crisis, and he won't deal with it," the incredulous Fr. X. told me. "This is not good, not good at all.").

The priest further said that the cardinal would not take questions from the floor, only written questions given to his staff in advance, which outraged the priests in attendance. Concluded Fr. X.: "Basically, we're dealing with a bunker mentality. We're going to have to gear up for a long, drawn-out drama.

Somebody said to Egan, 'What should we tell our people?' He said to tell the adults whatever you like, just don't be overdramatic, and keep in mind that whatever you say could affect ongoing legal proceedings. It's all in terms of how he's doing with lawyers. There's no facing that this is a spiritual and management crisis."

[Mike Fieschko]

At the time of this posting, the story is about a quarter of the way down the page. I've supplied some formatting.

If true and accurate, this will make it more difficult for Cdl Egan -- if he loses the support of the priests.

[APBaer]

This is nuts.

Nobody rational lawyer sues a priest in the hopes that he has hidden in his vestments a big wad of cash.
They sue the priest so that they can get to the Church and get a big payday.

Egan would be :
Shooting himself in the foot to do this,and
The Church's insurance carrier would insist on supplying a lawyer, because they don't want to be on the hook ultimately.

[Ciexyz]

Priests should insist on a new policy: that they be accompanied by a witness (another priest or parishoner) whenever they deal with youth. They should insist that for their own protection and reputation, that they never be alone with a young person. The Church should provide and if necessary pay for the services of another person who would serve as guarantor of the priest's good conduct. (This goes for all clergy people.)

[CatoRenasci]

No, I'll bet the Church's insurance is tapped out and they can't get more. Or the carriers may be saying this isn't covered because its crime and intentional tort, and they're not liable to defend or pay.

[Torie]

The top echelan seems eager to pork the pooch every chance they get. I simply can't understand the strategy.

[aculeus]

No, I'll bet the Church's insurance is tapped out and they can't get more.

If not yet tapped out the carriers will not renew ... or they'll quote a price on the moon.

[a history buff]

Or maybe Egan, who shot to fame as a fundraiser, and not a theologian, wants the priests to turn every penny twice, and doesn't want to not project a rich church.

[gcruse]

From the priest's point of view, he should go for the
$100 lawyer in cases where he knows he is guilty,
thereby keeping his own financial liability low.  If
the priest knows he is innocent, he wants the $800 an hour
attorney, 'cause the church will pay.  One wonders
what God has in mind with all this, though, when
you consider the victims.
 
 

[Dr. Scarpetta]

What this means is a priest who gets hauled into court on the flimsiest of pretexts will have to hire his own lawyer -- priests, of course, make little money -- and can't hope to get a penny of that back unless he wins. "Does this mean I have to hire the $100-an-hour guy over the $800-an-hour guy?" Father X. told me.

For what it's worth, O'Reilly had two attorneys on last night who represent priests' victims, and they both said that they believe everyone they represent is telling the truth. Their clients are tormented and have a harrowing story to tell.

[Clive]

Doesn't the archdiocese church have liability insurance for its priests?

Standard liability insurance coverage covers defence costs for civil actions.

Some policies cover defence costs of criminal proceedings where the offence arose in the course of duties, but in the case of criminal proceedings, the costs are only covered in retrospect if the accused is acquitted.

A few years ago this became an issue when a police department charged a child protection officer and her supervisor with criminal negligence causing death when a parent caused the death of a child after the agency had recommended release of the child to her care,

[Mike Fieschko]

Doesn't the archdiocese church have liability insurance for its priests?

I'd expect it to have such a policy.

Standard liability insurance coverage covers defence costs for civil actions.

Maybe these policies are out of the ordinary, with non-standard provisions.

A while ago, I saw stories about Boston, where the coverage was capped at a certain annual dollar amount. (To make up an example to illustrate: 'maximum payment totalling $1 million for incidents in 1985'.) Boston was approaching or had exceeded some caps. The implication of the story was that once the cap was reached, the insurance carrier has no more responsibility.

Disclaimer: I don't know anything about the New York Archdiocese's coverage.

If Cdl Egan's saying these things to his priests (about hiring their own lawyers), then the insurance company's no longer supplying lawyers (if it ever did), or the archdiocese is cutting back on what the Archdiocese provided.

[aristeides]

Can a diocese declare bankruptcy? Are liabilities of this sort dischargeable in bankruptcy?

[Mike Fieschko]

Can a diocese declare bankruptcy? Are liabilities of this sort dischargeable in bankruptcy?

I don't know the answer to either question.