Nearly five years after the General Assembly passed landmark legislation allowing lawsuits to be filed over decades-old child sexual abuse claims, the North Carolina Supreme Court will hear challenges that have left hundreds of plaintiffs in legal limbo.
Dusty McKinney will be the planned Supreme Court hearings on September 18 will determine whether he and hundreds of others can sue people they accuse of abusing them and their employers.
McKinney and two other East Gaston High wrestlers have filed a lawsuit against the Gaston County Board of Education. The board had received numerous complaints about physical and sexual abuse by wrestling coach Garry Scott Goins but dismissed them after minimal investigation, leaving other children vulnerable to his unsupervised access to them in the 1990s and 2000s, the lawsuit says.
McKinney reported the abuse and Goins was convicted in 2014 in federal court on 17 related charges and sentenced to 34 years in prison, he said.
Despite the shocking testimony about the coach and the accompanying complaints, it was McKinney who was shunned by some of his former teammates, he said. He also had no means to hold accountable those who could have stopped the abuse, said McKinney, who is 38 and now lives in Georgia.
When the SAFE Child Act passed, he thought he would finally get his chance.
“It was almost like it was too good to be true,” said McKinney, an officer who served in the U.S. Army for 18 years.
The SAFE Child Act, which was unanimously passed by state legislatures on October 31, 2019, gave victims of child sexual abuse the ability to file lawsuits against perpetrators and the organizations that employed them in 2020 and 2021.
McKinney’s was one of about 250 lawsuits filed under the SAFE Child Act revival window involving more than 450 defendants seeking damages for physical and emotional trauma resulting from child abuse by employees of numerous agencies. Those include the Roman Catholic dioceses in Charlotte and Raleigh; Boy Scout councils across the state; and the national and regional councils of the YMCA.
The lawsuits also name about two dozen school boards, including one claim against the Durham and Charlotte-Mecklenburg boards. Multiple claims were also filed against the Wake board.
North Carolina law and many other states now recognize research showing that coping with child sexual abuse can take many years, with many survivors not coming forward until they are adults. According to one study, the average for men and women to report child sexual abuse in institutions was 52.
However, attorneys representing the Gaston County Board of Education, the Roman Catholic Diocese of Charlotte and the United Methodist Church reject the idea of a delayed civil court claims are legal.
Their arguments in court documents raise questions about the constitutionality of the renewal period, whether it allows claims against employers or only against perpetrators, and whether individuals who have already filed unsuccessful lawsuits can renew their legal claims.
The Gaston Board of Education, along with other defendants, alleges that the window deprives North Carolina residents of rights protected by the state Constitution since 1776. Specifically, once a claim has expired or a court has ruled on a case, it cannot be resumed, they argue.
These lawsuits also place a heavy burden on organizations working for today’s children, as they must challenge emotionally charged claims that are decades old, they say.
“Maintaining the Revival Window would shift the costs of addressing decades-old claims onto Today “Children, and the hardworking men and women who try to help these children,” wrote Elizabeth L. Troutman, representing the Gaston County Board of Education.
So far, the lower courts have issued mixed rulings against plaintiffs. In two cases coming before the Supreme Court, The judges at first instance ruled against the plaintiffs, while the Court of Appeal ruled in their favor.
If the Supreme Court rules that the state constitution prohibits the revival period, it would be a setback for all plaintiffs.
Below are the five cases scheduled to be heard by the North Carolina Supreme Court on September 18.
Case 1: McKinney, et al. vs. Goins, et al..
Legal question: Is the revival window unconstitutional under the North Carolina Constitution? If the justices rule that the window is unconstitutional, the decision would likely put an end to other challenges that will follow.
Claimants:Three former East Gaston High School students filed a lawsuit in 2020 seeking monetary damages from the Gaston County Board of Education and a former wrestling coach, Goins, who was convicted in 2014 of rape of underage students and other crimes related to his abuse of students.
Defendants: The state constitution guarantees that a claim that has expired cannot be renewed, stripping people of rights they have acquired since the state was founded, they argue. Such a change sets a dangerous precedent for rolling back expired claims in other categories. It could destroy the stability and predictability organizations need to do business and lead to huge increases in insurance premiums.
Case 2: Cohane vs. The Home Missioners of America, et al.
Legal question: Whether the reintroduction of the SAFE Child Act will only apply to abusers or also to institutions that help children.
Claimant: Gregory Cohane alleges that Al Behm, a lay Catholic brother who is no longer affiliated with the church, sexually abused him when Cohane was about 17 to 21 years old. He is seeking damages from Home Missioners of America, the Roman Catholic Diocese of Charlotte and Al Behm.
Defendants: The law only opens the window “for child sexual abuse,” meaning civil lawsuits can only be filed against perpetrators. They argue that those “related” to child sexual abuse are not included in the revival window, protecting employers and institutions from lawsuits.
Cases 3 and 4: Individuals in return for the Roman Catholic Diocese of Charlotte
Legal question: Does the SAFE Child Act allow for cases that have previously been tried and dismissed to be revived?
Claimants: Plaintiffs, described as John Doe and John Doe 1K, sought help from two different priests as children and were repeatedly sexually abused, court documents allege. Lawsuits filed in 2011 were dismissed in 2014 and 2015 because time had passed. The two men filed new lawsuits against the diocese under the two-year revival period.
Defendants: These cases should be dismissed because plaintiffs cannot revive cases that have previously been tried and dismissed. The SAFE Child Act revives claims against predators, not their employers, and the revival law is unconstitutional.
Case 5: Fore v. Western NC Conference of the United Methodist Church, et al.
Legal question: Have the Conference and other stakeholders been properly notified of the plaintiff’s successful request to receive uncensored investigative reports into allegations of abuse?
Claimants: Lisa Biggs Fore alleges her parents sexually abused her in the 1970s while they were all living at The Children’s Home in Winston-Salem, where her parents worked. According to the lawsuit, Fore reported the alleged abuse to Rockingham County officials when she was 17. Fore filed a lawsuit under the SAFE Child Act in 2021 alleging that the conference and The Children’s Home engaged in negligent supervision of her parents and other actions that caused Fore harm.
Defendants: Fore filed a motion asking the conference and the home to provide investigative data on all sexual abuse claims, which a judge granted. Fore failed to properly notify the conference and home of the motion.
Virginia Bridges covers criminal justice in the Triangle and throughout North Carolina for The News & Observer. Her work is produced with the financial support of the nonprofit The Just Trust. The N&O retains full editorial control over her journalism.
