Table Of Content

SUPREME COURT STATE OF NEW YORK couwrr OF MONROE NANCY KARER and KARTIN MAHER, plaintifte, ave- ‘VERIFIED COMPLAINT. BROTHER JOHN LAURENCE HEATHWOOD, Individually; CONGREGATION OF CHRISTIAN BROTHERS OF IRELAND; ROMAN CATHOLIC DIOCESE OF ROCHESTER; BISHOP KEARVEY HIGH SCHOOL Defendants. Plaintiffs, by sheir attorneys, TULREADER, ROjENH, SULLIVAN, CLIFTORD, SANTORO & KAUL, ae and for their complint Sy PRELIMINARY SUMTRERT Py against Defendants, respectfully allege as follows: 1. Plaintiff waney Maher (hereinafter rofeivedko as "Plainet#é*) beings this action against Defendants for danages sustained by Plaintite, resulting from pofendant Heathwood» somal abuse of Plaintiff over a poriod of at least twanty-otght yeare beginning sbon Plaintitt was 12 years old and continuing util she wae 40 years old, vnile Defendant Heathwood was in the enploy and under the supervision of the other three named Defendants. Dafondant Hosthwood a€ a course of contiavous conduct assaulted, battered, nolosted, harassed, somelly abused and raped Plaintiff from approximately 1965 until 1992. Plaintifé has suffered physical and psychological injuries as a direct and Proxinata result of Defondant aeathwood’a wrongful conduct. 2. Platntifé further briaga thie action against the other named Defendants for damages sustained by Plaintiff as a result of Defendants’ negligence, recklessness, and willfulness in Placing, supervising, retaining and referring Defendant Heathwood in positions of trust and as a result of Defendant’ failure in theix duty to address the problem of sexual abuse by clergy, of which Defendants were or should have been awara. 3. As q result of Defendants! actions, Plaintift hes heen severely ptychologically damaged suffering from repressed nawory, dissociation, denial dud posttraumatic stress syndrome, loaving her unable to puroue any legal action until recent counseling enabled her to recognize the injury she has suffered and to take Legal action. 4. Regendants’ false representations to Plaintiff on which she relicd; Dafendante’ threats, coercion and deception Gieablad Plaintiff fro pursuing legal action earlier, 5. Plaintiff uartin Haher brings a derivative action for lone of consortium from November 19, 1983, the date Plaintiffs wore married to the prasent. FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS 6. Plaintiff Nancy Maher was born on October 18, 1952. 7. Plaintif® and her family belonged to, and were active members of, the Roman Catholic Diacess in Rochester, New York, conteibuting financially, and solicited actively though the mail and otherwise for contributions by Defendants. 4, Plaintiff's two sisters, one brother, and herself attended Bishop Kearney igh School im Rochester, New Tork. ° 9. Plaintiff attended Bishop Kearney High School from 1966 to 1970, 10. Upon infosnation and belief, Bishop Roaeney High School is a parochial acheol evned and operated by tha Roman Catholic Diogese of Rochester and by the Congregation of Christian Brothers of Ireland, (hereinafter ceferred to as “Cheistian Brothars") the Order from which the teachers at the school come. 11. Upon information and belief, the Christian Brothers are 9 Ronan Catholic Order headquartered in Rone, Italy, and located throughout the world, including the united states, with the Hastorn U.S. Province hoadquarters located in New Rochelle, few York, 12. Upon information and belief, Defendant Bishop Kearnay High School 1s usder the furiedietion of the Ronan Catholic Diocese of Rochester and the Christian Brothers 13, Defendant Heathwood, a Frofeased Ixish Christian Brother, belonging to the Christian Brothas, and at ali tines material hereto, employed by Defendants Christian Brothers, ond for 4 period of time by Bishop Keaxney High School and the Ronan Catholic Diocesa of Rochester, was assigned by his Order to Bishop Kearney High School in Rochester, New York, upon information and belief, on or about 1964 ag a math teacher and head of the Dranatice Progran and Sunmex Theater Progran. 14. Defendant Heathwood remained a teacher at Bishop Koarney High School from 1964 uatil 1974 when he left Rochester and was reassigned to, upon infoenation and belief, other schools in the State of ew York, 15. Upon information and balieg, Defendant. Heathwood was reassigned several years ago to Bishop Hendricken High School, Warwick, Rhode Island, where he has boen a teacher to the present. 16, Upon information and belief, sometiae prior to coming to Rochester, Defendant Heathwood was a teacher at a school in St. Johns, Newfoundland, Canada, where he taught first grade for 17 years. 17. upon information and belief, Defendant Heathwood will he retiring from teaching in June 1993 and leaving Rhode Island for another destination unknown, and ie, upon information and belief, currently residing in Connecticut ox New Jersey. 18. Soon after coming to Rochester, New York, Defendant Heathwood uat Plaintiff's parents at a Bishop Kearney High School function and Plaintifi’s father and mother and Defendant Heathwood becams vary good friends. 19; as the friendship between Plaintiff's father and nother and Defendant Beathwood grew, Defendant Heathwood had numerous eecasions to be around Flatatiff, both alone and 4n the company of others. 20. Plaintiff’s parente entrusted her, and her siblings, to Dafendant Heathwood, ae a Brother, teacher and friend. 21, When PlaintLef began high echool at Bishop Kearney, Defendant Heathwood, at the request of Plaintiff's parents, tutored Plaintiff for a period of time. 22. As head of the Dramatics Department, Defendant Heathwood was again ina position of ‘supervieory authority over Plaintiff who was very active in the department. 23. Ag head of the summer stock progran, Defendant Heathwood again wae Plaintiff's teacher as she participated in the summer theater program, 24. Representing Bishop Kearney High School, tha Cheistian Brothers and the Rowan Catholic Diocese of Rochester at soveral church and social functions, Defandant: Heathwood continucd to have access to Plaintits, 25, Starting at least ap early as 1965, when Plaintitt was 12 years old, and continuing to in ox about 1992, Defendant Moathwood injured Plaintiff Nancy Maher by acts including, but not Limited to, the followin A. Forcibly abusing her physically and semaliy on many occasions against her wil? by acts which included, and vere sot Limited to, fondling, sexual intercourse, penetration with fingexa and objects, fellatio, slapping, pinching, biting, and sucking Plaintigi‘s breasts, slapping her buttocks and genitals and taking photographe of her with welts all over her body. B. Lewd comments, sexual innuendos, harasament, threats, comments meant to humiliate Plaintiff and prey upon Dlaintiti'a fear and feelings of degradation and helplessness. 26. Defendant Heathwood comitted the above acts, and othars like them against Plaintiff without her consent and against hax will by force and duress. 27. pafendant Heathwood threstenad to show the photographa he had taken of Plaintiff to Plaintiff's mother to ineure her silence. 28. Several of Defendant Heathwood’s acts towards Plaintiff occurred on trips Defendant took Plaintif# on out of New York State. 29. Atter Defendant Heathwood left Rochester in 1974 ha ‘traveled back and forth betwoon various states and Wew York and continued to commit the acts described above. 30. After leaving Rochester, Defendant Heathwood continued to return to Rochester as many as five times a yoar for Bishop Kearney High School class reunions, graduations, waddinga, funerals and sccial occasions involving wenbers of the Ronan Catholic Diocese of Rochester and Bishop Kearney High School. 31, Dering his absences frum Rochester, Defendant Heathwood called Plaintiff on mmerous cocasions making lewd and sexually suggestive connents. 32. On one visit to Rochester in July 1992, Dafandant Hoathwood say Plaintiff and, in the presence of her three year old son, mashed his body against here, pressed his knees into her genitals and grabbed her boasts. 33. Defendant Heathwood continued his acts towards Plaintiff after Plaintiff was married on Novenber 19, 1963. 34, During the entire period in which Defendant Heathwood engaged in the above noted conduct, be was in @ position of trast as a Professed Brother, family friend, and an outwardly caring manber of the school, the Diocose and the Order. 35. During this entire period, Defendant Heathwood maintained his outward facade and represented himself to Plaintifé 45 one ontrusted with her cane. 36. During thie entire period, Defeadant Reathwood nisceprusented and concealed fron Plaintiff the wrongful nator of his action towards hor and committed these acts in secrecy. 37. During this antire period, Defendant Heathwood, intended and induced Plaintiff to rely on his false representations so that she vould not reveal his conduct or acte to anyone. 38. Defendant Heathwood know that his actions ware wrongful and that Ris contrary representations to Plaintiff were false. 39. Plaintiff did aot know chat Defendant Heathwood! « roprosentations wore false, relied on Defendant Heatiwood’s representations, and suffered serious injury as @ result. 40, Ae a result of Defendant Heathwood’s acta, Plaintite suffered fron a poychological condition whezeby she repressed, denied, blocked and dissociated harself fron the acts being committed on her to avoid the severe physical and emotional pain and trauma caused by them. Consequently, she was not aware of the wrong that had bean done to her, 41, As a direct and proximate result of Defendants conduct, Plaintifi suffered, and continues to suffer, severe and chronic physica? and psychological injuries. 42, Plaintitt’s physical injuries include, but are not Limited to, the following: chronic cexvicitis, cervical scarring, vaginal bleeding, bleeding breasts, dyshydxotic cexama, and inability to conceive children. 43. among Plaintiff's psychological injuries’ are the following! chronic posttraumatic atresa disorder, dissociative disorder, nightmares, flashbacks, terror, suicidal feelings, panic attacks, somal disorders, eating disorders, represeion of manories and sleep disorder: 44. In or about the Fall of 1992, Plaintiz£ began therapy and was able to recall, recognize and understand the consequences of Defendant Heathaod's abuse of her and vas able to take Legal action. 45. through therapy and counseling, Plaintiff is in the process of remembering details, dates, and other instances of Dofendant Heathwood's sequal abuwe of her. 46, Plaintiff’e allagations against Defendant. Heathwood have basn corroborated by his adaispions to common acquaintances and by the revelation of at least one other woman to Plaintiff that Dofendant Heathwood sexually abused this woman throughout her childhood as well, during the same period he was abusing Flaintige. 47, Upon information and belief, during Defendant Heathwood’ tenure in Newfoundlakd, several allegations of sexual misconduct and abuse were raised against the Christian Brothers Order in Newfoundland and several lavoults were brought against the Christian Brothers, zesulting in prison terme for six necbers of the christian Brothers. 49. upon inforwation and belief, Defendants were aware, or should have been aware, of the numerous allegations and Anstances of sexual abuse by clergy of children and nembora ef the Rowan Catholic comunity during the period of this action. 49. Upon infornation and belief, Defendants have taken no steps to Investigate ouch allegations or to act with due caze upon the allegations nade, 50. Upon information and belief, one of tha persons to whom Defendant Heathwood admitted his sexual abuse of Plaintiff racoived 2 threatening telephone call the day after Plaintiféa’ attorney apoke with the attorney for the Christian Brothers indicating that Defendant Heathwood had admitted hie acts to certain people. Upon information and belief, this person was threatened with a loss of her childran and hor job by a party identifying itself as connected with the Christian Brothers. 51. Dedendants continued to assign befendant Heathwood to schools where he would have constant interaction with childzen. 52. Upon information and belief, another Brother belonging to the Christian Brothers, teaching at Bishop Kearney High School, and accused of statutory rape charges in 1974, is currently listed as a member of tha Advisocy Board of the Christian Brothers, 52. Defendants Christian Brothers, Bishop Kearney Wigh School and the Roman Catholic Diocese of Rochester intentionally misrepresented to Plaintiff and hex family the trustworthiness of Defendant Heathwood during a period of tine material hereto. 105