982 F. Supp. 2d 437
E.D. Pa.2013Background
- Doe sues PSU, The Second Mile, and Sandusky for sexual abuse and related tort claims; PSU moves to dismiss vicarious liability and civil conspiracy claims.
- Sandusky abused Doe in a PSU facility shower during Sandusky’s PSU tenure and used his status to groom Doe.
- Second Mile had ongoing ties to PSU; PSU allowed Sandusky and Second Mile-associated minors to use PSU facilities on campus.
- Doe alleges PSU knew of Sandusky’s conduct and failed to supervise or restrain him, yet offered incentives to Sandusky years later.
- Court applies Pennsylvania law and Rule 12(b)(6) standards; vicarious liability requires acts within scope of employment, while civil conspiracy survives for later development.
- Court grants dismissal of vicarious liability claim and denies dismissal of civil conspiracy claim without prejudice to raise later
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Is PSU vicariously liable for Sandusky’s abuse? | Doe argues Sandusky acted within PSU’s scope of employment. | PSU contends Sandusky’s acts were outrageous, outside the scope of employment. | No; Sandusky’s acts outside scope; vicarious liability dismissed. |
| Does Doe state a civil conspiracy claim? | Doe asserts a plausible conspiracy among PSU actors. | PSU argues lack of plausible conspiracy facts. | Plaintiff's civil conspiracy claim survives at this stage. |
Key Cases Cited
- Lunn v. Boyd, 403 Pa. 231 (Pa. 1961) (employer may be liable for servant’s torts within scope of employment)
- Fitzgerald v. McCutcheon, 410 A.2d 1270 (Pa. Super. Ct. 1979) (outrageous acts may fall outside scope of employment)
- Sanchez by Rivera v. Montanez, 645 A.2d 383 (Pa. Cmwlth. 1994) (sexual abuse of a minor generally outside scope of employment)
- First Church of Christ v. Hughes/North Church, 748 A.2d 692 (Pa. Super. Ct. 2000) (minister’s sexual abuse not within employment scope)
- Doe v. Liberatore, 478 F. Supp. 2d 742 (M.D. Pa. 2007) (federal court: priest’s abuse not within employer’s scope)
- Joseph M. v. Northeast Educational Intermediate Unit 19, 516 F. Supp. 2d 424 (M.D. Pa. 2007) (teacher’s abuse not within scope of employment)
- Potter Title & Trust Co. v. Knox, 381 Pa. 202 (Pa. 1955) (ratification defense rejected; acts outside employment scope)