Ippolito v. Archdiocese of Philadelphia
42 Pa. D. & C.5th 89
Pennsylvania Court of Common P...2014Background
- Plaintiff Michele Ippolito, administratrix of John A. Ippolito's estate, sues the Archdiocese of Philadelphia and St. Joseph Parish for decades-old sexual abuse of the decedent by Msgr. George J. Mazzotta (1966–1971) at St. Joseph Parish.
- Decedent died on September 9, 2011; plaintiff filed a writ of summons March 28, 2012, and later a complaint asserting survival, wrongful death, and loss of consortium claims.
- Defendants moved for summary judgment arguing the claims are barred by the statute of limitations; plaintiff opposed.
- The court held that the survival, wrongful death, and loss-of-consortium claims are time-barred and granted summary judgment in favor of the Archdiocese Defendants with prejudice.
- The court analyzes accrual, tolling, discovery rule, and fraudulent concealment as to why the limitations periods cannot be tolled.
- The decision relies on Pennsylvania law distinguishing accrual for sexual-abuse torts and derivative nature of wrongful death and consortium claims.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the survival action is time-barred | Ippolito's estate asserts timely accrual and tolling exceptions. | Survival claim accrues at injury date; discovery and tolling do not apply; years elapsed exceed limitations. | Survival action time-barred; two-year period began 1966–1971 and expired by 1973. |
| Whether the discovery rule tolls the survival action | Decedent repressed memory tolls the statute. | Discovery rule does not apply to sexual abuse claims; objective approach governs tolling. | Discovery rule inapplicable; tolling not available for repressed-memory or later discovery. |
| Whether fraudulent concealment tolls the survival action | According to Meehan, concealment by defendants could toll the statute. | No affirmative concealment act proven; general conduct not tolling behavior. | Fraudulent concealment doctrine does not apply; survival claim time-barred. |
| Whether the wrongful death action is time-barred | Underlying claim not time-barred at decedent's death should support timely wrongful death. | Wrongful death derivative of untimely underlying action; barred. | Wrongful death action untimely; linked to untimely survival claim and time-barred at decedent's death. |
| Whether the loss of consortium claim is time-barred | Loss of consortium is recoverable within the same limitations horizon as survival. | Consortium runs with survival; time-barred when survival is time-barred. | Loss of consortium time-barred; derivative of decedent's survival claim. |
Key Cases Cited
- Meehan v. Archdiocese of Philadelphia, 870 A.2d 912 (Pa. Super. 2005) (discusses fraudulent concealment and tolling in sexual-abuse cases)
- Dalrymple v. Brown, 701 A.2d 164 (Pa. 1997) (accrual in sexual abuse cases; limitations begin at time of injury)
- E.J.M. v. Archdiocese of Phila., 622 A.2d 1388 (Pa. Super. 1993) (discusses discovery rule limitations in sexual abuse cases)
- Seto v. Willits, 638 A.2d 258 (Pa. Super. 1994) (notes limits on applying discovery rule to memory repression)
- Aquilino v. Philadelphia Catholic Archdiocese, 884 A.2d 1269 (Pa. Super. 2005) (recovery of repressed memory cannot toll statute)
- Delaney v. Archdiocese of Philadelphia, 924 A.2d 659 (Pa. Super. 2007) (no affirmative concealment tolling where inquiries not made)
- Lazarski v. Archdiocese of Philadelphia, 926 A.2d 459 (Pa. Super. 2007) (affirmative concealment requirement not met by general conduct)
- Moyer v. Rubright, 651 A.2d 1139 (Pa. Super. 1994) (wrongful death derivative rule; underlying action time-barred affects survivor claim)