Status of Litigation:
The Sixth Circuit reversed the decision of the U.S. District Court, Eastern
District of Kentucky that had dismissed two lawsuits (Doe II and Doe III) filed
by 95 Plaintiffs against the LFUCG and various government officials asserting
claims against the LFUCG for its failure to protect thousands of children who
participated in the Micro-City Government when it should have known that the
organization's director, Ron Berry, was molesting participants. In so doing, the
Sixth Circuit concluded that the district court had abused its discretion, and
agreed with the Plaintiffs' request to reopen the original suit because
appropriate notice of settlement and dismissal had never been provided to
victims. John Doe, et al v. LFUCG 407 F.3d 755 (6th Cir. 2005).
On May 5, 2005, the Sixth Circuit remanded the matter to the U.S. District
Court, Eastern District of Kentucky in Lexington, and the case was assigned to
Federal Judge William O. Bertelsman of Covington for handling. Guy et al. v.
LFUCG, et al, 5:98-cv-00431-WOB.
In May, 2008, Judge Bertelsman dismissed the Plaintiffs' claims against the
Individual Defendants, ruling that the statutes of limitations had run prior to
the filing of the Does' claims.
On May 1, 2009, Judge Bertelsman reversed his prior ruling and reinstated
the claims of four of the Doe IV Plaintiffs' claims against the Individual
Defendants, and held that the statute of limitations had not run for victims who
reached the age of 19 on or after October 15, 1998. Judge Bertelsman
dismissed the remaining Doe IV victims' claims as being barred by the statute
of limitations, stating that the statute of limitations for the Plaintiffs' claims
against the LFUCG was the same as it was against Ronald Berry -- the actual
Morris & Morris filed a Petition with the Sixth Circuit, seeking to have Judge
Bertelsman's ruling reviewed, in the hopes of having the statute of limitations
held in abeyance until it was known that the LFUCG was aware of Berry's
abuse but continued to fund his activities. In May, 2012, a 3-judge panel of the
Sixth Circuit denied our request and upheld Judge Bertelsman's rulings. Sixth
Circuit 5-2-12 Opinion. Morris & Morris promptly filed a Motion seeking to
have the decision reviewed by the entire Sixth Circuit. That request was
denied., as was a request that the ruling be reviewed by the U.S. Supreme
The District Court ordered that Notice be provided to the general public in
order to determine whether there are other victims of abuse who had not yet
reached the age of 19 on October 15, 1998 -- i.e., persons who were born on or
after 10/16/1979 -- or persons who were suffering from a legal disability.
Following publication of the Notice, Morris & Morris successfully negotiated
settlements for its eligible clients.
|MORRIS & MORRIS, P.S.C.