Friday, July 15, 2005

Priest responds to McKitterick lawsuit

A Branson priest responded to a sexual harassment lawsuit in documents filed today in U. S. District Court for the Western District of Missouri.
Phillip A. Bucher claimed the court lacks jurisdiction because Glenna McKitterick, who filed the lawsuit last month, was serving the church in a ministerial capacity, and any involvement by the court would violate the establishment clause of the First Amendment.
Ms. McKitterick claimed she was fired from her job with the church after she refused to submit to Bucher's sexual advances. In addition to Bucher, defendants named in the lawsuit include the Roman Catholic Diocese of Springfield-Cape Girardeau, Archbishop John J. Liebrecht, Our Lady of the Lake Catholic Church, and Our Lady of the Ozarks Catholic Church.
Ms. McKitterick was the sole proprietor of Discipleship Ministry Resources when she was hired by the church on July 1, 2002 for a two-year term as a pastoral associate, according to her lawsuit.
Her responsibilities, she said, were training coordination "for an evangelization program and model for the church and its parishes." Bucher was the pastor of Our Lady of the Lake Catholic Church and served as Bishop Liebrecht's vicar general.
Shortly after her employment, Ms. McKitterick claims, she began having to fend off Bucher's unwelcome advances, which included"
-"Unwelcome questioning by Bucher about plaintiff's personal sex life and her intimate sexual likes and dislikes.
-"Bucher's regular recounting to plaintiffs of his own personal sex life and details of his intimate sexual likes and dislikes, including his sexual dislikes with his then 'girlfriend,' (whose name is given in the lawsuit, but which is not going to be listed here. The alleged girlfriend later told the Springfield News-Leader that Bucher is just a friend.).
-"Plaintiff being 'hushed' during business meetings in the parish offices, so plaintiff would not be overheard by Bucher's girlfriend when Bucher and the girlfriend were talking on the telephone.
-"Plaintiff being invited to 'business' dinners with Bucher, which he began conducting like personal dates.
-"Plaintiff being subjected to Bucher's unwelcome comments about his personal preferences 'as a man' regarding plaintiff's makeup, etc., to which plaintiff objected.
-"Numerous uncomfortable private 'hugs' by Bucher which he defended as 'pastoral' and which he repeatedly attempted even after being rebuked by plaintiff.
-"Regular telephone calls by Bucher to plaintiff at her home in the evening about personal matters.
-"Regular romantic and sexually suggestive remarks and advances by Bucher."Ms. McKitterick says Bucher's actions created "a hostile work environment."She claims that Liebrecht and other church officials had been warned about Bucher's problem and they should have known he was likely to sexually harass her.
Ms. McKitterick was fired after she made a written complaint against Bucher in a letter dated Jan. 12, 2004, one of a series she had made, according to the lawsuit.
After the Jan. 12 letter, she received a call from the church's lawyer who said, "Bucher has terminated you." Her last day of work was Jan. 16, 2004, five and a half months before the end of her contract. The firing, she said, "was retaliation against plaintiff for her reporting and complaining about the sexual harassment and hostile work environment."
Ms. McKitterick is asking for "lost earnings and employment benefits; for such punitive damages as are proven at trial; for reasonable attorneys' fees; and for such other relief as may be appropriate."
She is also suing church officials for misrepresentation, saying they had told her that "if she became employed by the church, Bucher would not sexually harass her nor would he create a hostile work environment for her."
An additional count charges church officials with copyright infringement, claiming that Ms. McKitterick owns the rights to her work, "Discipleship: An Old Model for a New Day," registered Aug. 3, 2001, with the U. S. Copyright Office. "Since Jan. 16, 2004, the Church, Our Lady of the Lake Catholic Church and Our Lady of the Ozarks Catholic Church without the consent or permission of plaintiff; have claimed a copyright interest in plaintiff's work and have distributed and collected the benefits, revenue and profits from the work and from derivatives of the work."
She claims Bucher and Liebrecht supervised the infringement of her work. She is asking for $150,000 for each copyright infringement, attorneys' fees, and interest.Ms. McKitterick now serves as president of LAMPS, a national group that is seeking reform in the Catholic Church.
Bucher claims that the court should not get involved in the case because that would put it in the unconstitutional position of interfering with church decisions. "Plaintiff should clearly be considered clergy" for this case, the motion for dismissal said.
"As a clergy member, her claims are prohibited by the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment."
The motion also says, "Lastly, Missouri has only recognized two theories upon which a church may be liable for sexual misconduct: (1) intentional failure to supervise clergy and (2) intentional infliction of emotional distress. Neither claim is made by plaintiff in this case."
Bucher is represented by Benjamin Stringer of the Springfield law firm of Hall, Ansley, Rogers & Condry, P.C.
The churches, the diocese, and Bishop Liebrecht also filed a motion to dismiss today. also claiming the lawsuit violates the First Amendment Establishment Clause, that it is "unconstitutional and violates defendants' rights under the Missouri Constitution," and Ms. McKitterick "fails to state a cause of action."
Liebrecht, the diocese, and the churches, are represented by Warren E. Harris and Kevin Fitzgerald of the Springfield law firm of Taylor, Stafford, Clithero, Fitzgerald & Harris, LLP.

2 comments:

  1. Anonymous8:21 AM

    So the good priest and diocese are claiming the lady is a "member of the clergy" for purposes of the suit....I thought the catholic church did not allow women to members of the clergy! Interesting how the good priest's behavior should not be the issue.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Anonymous3:09 PM

    I have followed this story closely and I know first hand that this priest is capable of all he is accused of. This is not the first time he has behaved in that manner.

    ReplyDelete