Jeff Anderson and Associates, a St. Paul law firm that has gained national notoriety for its work on clergy sexual abuse cases, has made a practice of publicly releasing video depositions, transcripts and internal church documents that have been obtained through lawsuits filed in several states.
The firm says the public has a right to know the history of accused priests, and the actions taken by church leaders. But the Diocese of Duluth is hoping to avoid a large-scale release of documents in two St. Louis County cases brought by alleged victims of abuse that are scheduled to go to trial next year.
Attorneys for the diocese have filed a motion in State District Court in Duluth, asking a judge for a protective order precluding the plaintiffs’ attorneys from releasing evidence obtained through the pre-trial discovery process, citing potential harm to the diocese.
“There is apparently no determination as to where confidential or sensitive information is involved, no determination as to whether portions of the testimony or documents are irrelevant, or no determination of whether parties will be annoyed, embarrassed, or oppressed by the release of the information,” defense attorney Joy Anderson wrote in a 13-page memorandum. “Plaintiff’s counsel simply releases it wholesale.”
Mike Finnegan, the Anderson and Associates attorney handling the Duluth cases, sharply rejected the diocese’s claims, saying there is a larger need to protect children in the community.
“It’s really truth and transparency that protects kids - not keeping secrets,” Finnegan said. “It’s these types of documents that they’re trying to keep secret that often show how top officials cover up crimes.”
Judge David Johnson will hear oral arguments on the issue at a motion hearing Thursday at the St. Louis County Courthouse in Duluth.
This isn’t the first time the church has sought such an order from the court. Previous attempts by the Archdiocese of St. Paul and Minneapolis and the Diocese of Winona to classify discovery materials as confidential were rejected by judges, Finnegan said.
Since April, Anderson and Associates has posted on its website video or transcripts of depositions from seven church leaders involved in alleged sexual abuse cases in Minnesota, the diocese noted. Other documents obtained from the church have regularly been posted to the site andersonadvocates.com, as well.
The releases, primarily dealing with the Archdiocese of St. Paul and Minneapolis, have garnered significant coverage from Twin Cities and statewide news organizations.
In its motion, the Duluth diocese argued that Anderson and Associates regularly releases information that is favorable to the plaintiffs, generating negative media coverage and inflaming public opinion about the church. Such coverage has the potential to prejudice the jury pool, the diocese argued.
“This news coverage has the tendency to inflame public anger against all Catholic priests and officials, even those not mentioned in the stories,” diocese attorney Joy Anderson wrote. “Without a protective order in this case, Plaintiff’s counsel will undoubtedly continue to publicly disseminate deposition transcripts and discovery materials, even when they contain sensitive and private information.”
Finnegan said his firm takes precautions to avoid releasing sensitive information about victims. Further, they have released complete files on priests and entire depositions, not just selective pieces, he said.
“All that we’ve done in the past is make sure that long-held secrets about child sex abuse in this diocese are made public,” Finnegan said. “It’s not our commentary. It’s their own documents. Kids won’t be protected until all of these files see the light of day.”
The plaintiffs, identified in court documents only as Doe 5 and Doe 28, filed suits under the Minnesota Child Victims Act, which went into effect in May 2013. The legislation opened a three-year window for victims of child sexual abuse to sue over older incidents that occurred outside of the normal statute of limitations. Anderson and Associates has filed several dozen lawsuits against the church on behalf of alleged victims in those 15 months.
The Doe 5 and Doe 28 cases are scheduled to go to trial next February and December, respectively. The cases are still in the early stages of the discovery process.
