1

Michael Reck, State Bar No. 209895
mr

2

ec

k@ander s onadv

oc

at e s. c om

Michael G. Finnegan, State Bar No. 241091

4

o c at e s. c om
Jennifer E. Stein, State Bar No. 300775
ifer @ande r s onadv o c at e,s. com

5

JEFF ANDERSON & ASSOCIATES
ll8I2 San Vicente Boulevard, Suite 503

J

6
7
8

mi ke @ander s onadv

Los Angeles, Californi a 90049
Tel: 310-357-2425
Fax: 651-297 -6543

Attorneys for Plaintiff Patricia Harner

9
10

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

1l

FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES

I2
13

t4
15
16

17
18

t9
20

2I
22
23

24
25

26

) Case No.
)
) COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES:
Plaintiff,
)
1. INTENTIONAL INFLICTION OF
)
VS
EMOTIONAL DISTRESS;
)
NEGLIGENT INFLICTION OF
)
EMOTIONAL DISTRESS; and
)
THE PROTESTANT EPISCOPAL CHURCH IN )
UNFAIR BUSINESS PRACTICES
THE DIOCESE OF LOS ANGELES; and DOES )
(BUSTNESS & PROFESSTONS
1 -l 00.
coDE
)
$17200, ET SEQ.)

PATRICIA HARNER, an individual

2.
3.

Defendant(s).

)
) DEMAND FOR JURY
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

27
28

-lCOMPLAINT AND DEMAND FORJURY TRIAL

TRIAL

 COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES

1

2

Based upon information and belief available to Plaintiff Patricia Harner

J

as follows against Defendant, The Protestant Episcopal Church in the Diocese

4

DOES 1-100 (collectively "Defendant" or "Defendants"):

5

1.

("Plaintiff')

alleges

of Los Angeles and

This case presents a dangerous situation whereby Defendant The Protestant Episcopal

in the

Diocese

of Los Angeles is

of the danger posed by Paul Kowalewski

6

Church

7

("Kowalewski") and in spite of this knowledge it presents him as safe and continues to allow him to

8

function as a priest in good standing with access to children, parishioners and the public generally

9

without warning of his true nature. Specifically, Defendant has actual knowledge that Kowalewski

aware

l0 was previously a Roman Catholic Priest in the Diocese of Buffalo, New York and sexually
11

12
13

assaulted

multiple individuals, including both adults and children.

2.

Rather than defrock him and report him to law enforcement, Defendant allowed and

continues to allow Kowalewski to continue as an agent in the employ of Defendant as a member

of

t4 the clergy. As a result, of Defendant's cover up, Plaintiff brings this complaint to obtain justice
15

against Defendant.

l6
t7
18

t9
20

2l

PARTIES

3.

Plaintiff is an adult resident of the State of Florida. Plaintiff was sexually assaulted by

Kowalewski in the State of New York.

4.

Plaintiff was

a

parishioner at St. Amelia Parish. In approximately 197I, Plaintiff was

assaulted, harassed and sexually abused by Kowalewski, then, a Catholic priest.

5.

Plaintiff is informed and believes and thereon alleges that at all times material hereto,

22

Defendant is a non-profit religious entity, incorporated in California, with its principal place

aa

ZJ

business

24

operations

25

responsible

26

Defendant is the primary entity owning, operating and controlling the activities and behavior of its

27

employees and agents, including Kowalewski, Does 1-100, and

28

supervisors of Defendant. Plaintiff is further informed, believes and thereon alleges that Defendant

in Los Angeles County, Califomia. Defendant purposely conducts substantial

of

business

in and throughout the State of Califomia and County of Los Angeles. Defendant is

for

Protestant Episcopal Church operations

in Los Angeles County, California.
all other employees, agents

-lCOMPLAINT AND DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL

and

 1

has authority and responsibility to control and supervise Kowalewski.

6.

2

Plaintiff is informed and believes and thereon alleges that that true names

and

of Defendants named herein

J

capacities, whether individual, corporate, associate or otherwise,

4

Defendant Does 1 through 100, inclusive, are unknown to Plaintiff, who therefore sues Defendants

5

Does

6

names and capacities when such names have been ascertained.

7

thereon alleges that Does 1 through 100 are legally responsible

8

happenings, and/or tortious and unlawful conduct that caused the injuries and damages alleged in this

9

Complaint.

10

7.

I

as

through 100 by such hctitious names, and who will amend the Complaint to show their true

Plaintiff is informed and believes and

in some manner for the events,

Plaintiff is informed and believes and thereon alleges that at all times material hereto

11

there existed a unity of interest and ownership among Defendants and each of them, such that an

I2

individuality and separateness between tjefendants ceased to exists. Defendants were the successors-

13

in-interests andlor alter egos of the other Defendants in that they purchased, controlled, dominated

t4

and operated each other without any separate identity, observation

l5

separateness. To continue to maintain the fagade of a separate and individual existence between and

16

among Defendants, and each of them, would serve to perpetuate a fraud and injustice.

l7
18

8.

of formalities, or any other

Plaintiff is informed and believes and thereon alleges that at all times material hereto,

Defendants were the agents, representatives and/or employees of each and every other Defendant and

t9 were acting within the course and scope of said altemative personality,capacity, identity, agency,
20

representation and/or employment and were within the scope of their authority, whether actual or

21

apparent.

22

venturers, shareholders, co-conspirators, contractors, andlor employees

ZJ

Defendant, and the acts and omissions alleged herein were done by them, acting individually, through

24

such capacity and

25

every other Defendant, and that such conduct was thereafter ratified by each Defendant, and that each

26

Defendant is jointly and severally liable to Plaintiff.

At all times material hereto,

Defendants were the trustees, partners, servants, joint

of each and every other

within the scope of their authority and with the permission and consent of each and

2l
28
a

COMPLAINT AND DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL

 FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS REGARDING THE HISTORY OF
SEXUAL ABUSE OF CHILDREN AND ADULTS BY KOWALEWSKI

I
2
a

J

4
5

9.

Plaintiff is informed and believes that Kowalewski has sexually offended against

multiple individuals including children and an adult.

10.

Kowalewski was ordained and incardinated a Roman Catholic priest for the Diocese

6

of Buffalo, in New York, in 1973. Following his ordination, Kowalewski was assigned to various

7

parishes in the Diocese of Buffalo including St. Amelia, St. Martin, and St. Matthew. While a priest

8

of the Diocese of Buffalo, Kowalewski sexually assaulted multiple children and at least one adult.

9

11.

Upon information and belief, Kowalewski was sent to treatment at a church treatment

10

facility in Canada in response to his

11

Diocese of Buffalo in approximately 1977.

t2
13

12.

Upon information and belief, in the mid-1980s Kowalewski returned to ministry

associated with the United Methodist Church in upstate New York.

t4

13.

15

Syracuse University.

t6

abuse of children. Kowalewski left and/or was removed from the

Upon information and belief, in the late-1980s Kowalewski served as a chaplain at

14. In approximately 1990, Kowalewski began his career with Episcopal

Diocese of

t7 Central New York. He served at various facilities for this organization. In approximately
18

1998

Kowalewski was being considered for elevation to the position of Episcopal Bishop of the Diocese

t9 of Western New York. According to reports, Kowalewski withdrew his name from consideration.
20

15.

At some point, Kowalewski became a priest of the Episcopal Diocese of Los Angeles.

2l Between approximately 2005 and 2013, Kowalewski was assigned as the Rector of St. James
22
23

Episcopal Church in Los Angeles, California.

16.

Kowalewski is currently holding himself out as and works as an Episcopal Priest of

24

the Episcopal Diocese of Los Angeles at the Church of St. Paul in the Desert, in Palm Springs,

25

California (within the Episcopal Diocese of San Diego),

26

17.

Upon information and belief, Defendants knew or should have known of claims of

27

childhood sexual abuse involving Kowalewski. Upon information and belief, Defendants have been

28

aware and are aware of Kowalewski's dangerous propensities and history of sexual abuse of children.

-3COMPLAINT AND DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL

 1

Upon information and belief, Defendant has not reported Kowalewski to law enforcement. Defendant

2

continues to hold Kowalewski out as a priest in good standing who is safe to the public, safe to

a

children, and safe to parishioners.

J

4

18.

Plaintiff is aware of other victims of childhood sexual abuse by Kowalewski.

to affirmatively misrepresent

Kowalewski and his nature, history and

5

Defendant continues

6

background, and lttness to serve as a priest, and continues to present him as a priest in good standing

7

who is safe to the public, safe to children, safe to parishioners. Defendant has and continues to

8

represent that Kowalewski is not the subject of allegations of sexual misconduct with parishioners

9

and potentially others. These statements and representations are made

in spite of

Defendant's

10

knowledge to the contrary. Accordingly, Defendants are engaged and have been engaged in acts of

1l

false speech, misrepresentation and unfair tactics.

I2

19.

Plaintiff is aware of Kowalewski's current status as apriest and continued access to

13

the public, children and parishioners. Plaintiff has suffered and continues to suffer damages because

14

knowing that Kowalewski is a priest and the danger that Kowalewski presents to others, including

l5 both unsuspecting children and adults. Among other effects, Plaintiff suffers from anxiety, fear,
t6

sleeplessness, guilt, and general suffering as a

victim of Kowalewski's

abuse because she knows

of

l7 the danger Kowalewski presents to others, including parishioners of Defendants', including both
18

unsuspecting children and adults.

t9
20

2t
22
ZJ

24
25
26

27

ALLEGATIONS

20.

Plaintiff was raised in New York in a devoutly Catholic family. Plaintiff was sexually

assaulted by Kowalewski, who Plaintiff knew as her priest.

21.

When Plaintiff was a parishioner at St. Amelia's parish in the Diocese of Buffalo,

Plaintiff met Kowalewski who, served as both a deacon and later, the parish priest. It is through
Plaintiff

s status as a parishioner seeking

spiritual guidance and direction that Plaintiff came to know

and spend time with Kowalewski, both on and off church premises.

22.

While performing his duties as a priest, and for the purpose of fuithering the duties

required in that role, Kowalewski befriended Plaintiff and gained Plaintiff s trust and confidence as

28

-4COMPLAINT AND DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL

 I

a spiritual guide, authority figure, and trustworthy mentor.

23.

2

In approximately 197I, Kowalewski isolated Plaintiff when she sought his spiritual

J

guidance and direction, took Plaintiff to Kowalewski's bedroom in the rectory where he sexually

4

assaulted and abused Plaintiff.

24.

5

As a priest, authority figure, and trustworthy mentor, Plaintiff was conditioned to

6

comply with Kowalewski's direction and to respect him as a person of authority in spiritual, ethical,

7

and educational matters. Kowalewski's conduct constituted "grooming" of Plaintiff and culminated

8

in his sexual assault and abuse of Plaintiff.

25.

9

As a direct and proximate result of Kowalewski's ongoing

to children

and

to be allowed, enabled,

and

access

10

vulnerable adults without waming, which has been and continues

11

facilitated by Defendant, Plaintiff has suffered and will continue to suffer severe mental and emotional

t2

distress including, but not limited to severe anxiety, fear, lost interest and pleasure in activities, an

13

inability to concentrate, feelings of self-blame, feelings of estrangement from friends and/or family,

t4

hypervigilance, and a lost sense of worth.

26.

15

t6

As a direct and proximate result of Defendant's action andior failures to act Plaintiff

has suffered economic injury, all to Plaintiffls general, special and consequential damage in an

l7 amount to be proven at trial, but in no event less than the minimum jurisdictional amount of this
18

l9

Court.

27.

Defendants ratified and authorized Kowalewski's conduct bV (1) failing to discharge,

20

dismiss, discipline, suspend and/or supervise Kowalewski and/or other priests known by Defendants

2I

to have sexually abused children and others, or to have been accused ofsexually abusing children and

22

others, (2) actively shielding Kowalewski from responsibility for his sexual assaults, (3) disregarding

ZJ

the existence of sexual assault and sexual abuse complaints against Kowalewski, (4) failing to report

24

such complaints to civil or criminal authorities, and (5) not taking steps to timely remove Kowalewski

25

from the priesthood so as to permanently prevent him from using his authority bestowed upon him

26

by Defendants to gain access to minors and others.

27
28

28.

Defendants have numerous mandatory duties imposed upon them by state and federal

law, and written policies and procedures to protect children and others from harm, including but not

-5COMPLAINT AND DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL

 1

limited to:

2

a.

Duty to protect minor children in their care;

J

a

b.

Duty to provide adequate supervision to minor children in their care; and

4

c. Duty to report suspected

incidents of child abuse and more specifically childhood

sexual abuse (Penal Code Sections 1 I 166,11167).

5

29.

6

Defendants knew or should have known, or were otherwise on notice, that Kowalewski

7

had engaged in unlawful sexual conduct with minors in the past, and/or was continuing to engage in

8

such conduct, and failed to take reasonable steps, and to implement reasonable safeguards, to avoid

9

acts of unlawful sexual conduct in the future by Kowalewski.

30.

10

Defendants failed to report and concealed from other individuals, including Plaintiff,

11

law enforcement authorities, civil authorities, the true facts and relevant information necessary to

12

bring Kowaleski to justice for the sexual misconduct he committed and to ensure that those entrusted

13

in Defendants' care are protected.

31.

t4

Defendants negligently andlor intentionally suppressed, concealed,

or hid

this

15

information for the purposes of maintaining Kowalewski's image as an ethical, wholesome, safe, and

16

trusted spiritual leader at and within the institution run by the Defendants.

32.

T7

Defendants ignored and/or dismissed the sexual abuse perpetrated by Kowalewski and

18

instead, continued to allow numerous children, adults, parishioners and members of the public to be

19

exposed to Kowalewski, despite knowledge

20

mmors.

2l
22
23

24
25

33.

28

Plaintiff is informed, believes and thereon alleges that Defendants were given notice

of inappropriate conduct committed by Kowalewski, including the facts alleged herein.

34.

Defendants also implemented various measures designed to make or which effectively

made Kowalewski's conduct harder to detect, including but not limited to:

a.

Permitting Kowalewski to remain in a position of authority and trust after Defendants
knew that he was a danger to the public, including both children and adults;

26
27

of Kowalewski's prior sexually abusive acts toward

b.

Holding Kowalewski out to the community and the public as being in good standing,
trustworthy, and safe to be around the public, including minor children;

-6COMPLAINT AND DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL

 c. Failing to adequately supervise Kowalewski; and
d. Failing to take reasonable steps and to implement reasonable

I
2

safeguards to prevent

J

a

Kolalewski from accessing children to whom he poses

4

RESE,RVATION OF'RIGHT TO PLEAD PUNITIVE DAMAGES

35.

5

Based on information and

a

risk.

beliel Defendant is a religious corporation, organized under

6

the laws of California and believed to be afforded the protection of Code of Civil Procedure Section

7

425.14. Plaintiff expressly reseryes the right to hle a Motion to Amend the Complaint, in order to

8

allege facts sufficient to constitute punitive damages against Defendants, in accord with evidence that

9

substantiates a finding

10

3294.

FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION
INTENTIONAL INFLICTION OF EMOTIONAL DISTRESS
(Against All Defendants)

1l

t2
13

t4
15

t6
t7
18

l9
20

2l
22
23

24
25
26
27

of the clear and convincing evidentiary requirement of Civil Code Section

36.

Plaintiff repeats, re-alleges and incorporates herein by reference all consistent

paragraphs of this Complaint as

37.

if fully

set forth herein.

Defendants' conduct toward Plaintiff, as described herein, was outrageous and

extreme.

38.

A reasonable person would not expect or tolerate Defendants' putting Kowalewski in

positions of authority, which enabled Kowalewski to have access to the public, including minor
children, in the position of a priest, including minor children, given his known history of committing

wrongful sexual acts against others, including minor children.

39. A reasonable person would not expect or tolerate Defendants' failure to terminate
and/or supervise their agents and employees, including Kowalewski so as to prevent them from
committing wrongful sexual acts with minor children in their charge.

40.

Defendants' conduct described herein was intentional and malicious and done for the

purpose of causing or with the substantial certainty that it would cause Plaintiff to suffer anxiety, fear,

humiliation, mental anguish and emotional and physical distress.

41.

As a result, Plaintiff suffered and continues to suffer great pain of mind and body,

28

-7

-

COMPLAINT AND DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL

 of

1

shock, fear, emotional distress, physical manifestations of emotional distress, embarrassment, loss

2

self-esteem, disgrace, humiliation, and loss of enjoyment of life; has suffered and continues to suffer

J

a

and was prevented and

4

the full enjoyment of life;

5

will continue to incur

6

Plaintiff is thereby entitled to general and compensatory damages in amounts to be proven at trial.

8

10

1l

l2
l3

t4
15

t6
I7

will sustain loss of earnings

expenses

42.

an eaming capacity, and has incurred and/or

for medical and psychological treatment, therapy, and counseling.

Plaintiff repeats, re-alleges and incorporates herein by reference all consistent

paragraphs of this Complaint as if

43.

fully

set forth herein.

Through the conduct described above, Defendants were negligent. It was reasonably

foreseeable that Defendants' negligent conduct would cause Plaintiff severe mental anguish and

emotional distress.

44.

As a direct and proximate result of Defendants' actions Plaintiff has suffered and

emotional distress. Plaintiff is thereby entitled to general and compensatory damages in amounts to
be proven at trial.

l9

THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION
VIOI,ATION OF'R USINESS AND PROF'ESSION CODE
SECTION 17200, ET SEO.

20

(Against all Defendants)

22
23

24
25

26
27

will

continue to suffer economic loss, plain and suffering, and extreme and severe mental anguish and

l8

2l

and obtaining

SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION
NEGLIGENT INF'I,ICTION OF EMOTIONAL DISTRESS
(Against All Defendants)

7

9

will continue to be prevented from performing daily activities

45.

Plaintiff repeats, re-alleges and incorporates herein by reference all consistent

paragraphs of this Complaint as if

46.

fully

set forth herein.

Plaintiff is informed and believes and thereon alleges that Defendants have engaged

in unlawful, unfair and deceptive business practices, including making statements and representations

to the public, law enforcement and the court that Defendant's

agents and priests, including

Kolalewski, are safe, not sexually abusive and do not engage in sexual misconduct, knowing full and

well that Defendants had knowledge that others did not have, including allegations of sexual

28
8

COMPLAINT AND DEMAND FORJURY TRIAL

 I

misconduct involving their agents and employees, including Kowalewski.

47.

2

Defendants' conduct was done for the purpose of misleading law enforcement, and the

a

J

public into believing Defendants' institutions of worship and education were safe and free from child

4

molesters, when in fact they were not.

48.

5

Defendants' conduct was for the purpose

of continuing the flow of revenue to

6

Defendants from the public and to maintain the image of Defendants as institutions of high moral

7

repute.

8

49.

Defendants' unlawful, unfair, and deceptive business practices also included

9

knowingly employing, and continuing to employ, employees and agents who had been accused of

10

sexual misconduct involving minors, and placing them in direct contact with minors thereafter, to the

1l

peril of said minors and their parents.

t2
13

50.

I6

to

design, implement, and oversee policies regarding sexual

harassment and abuse of these minors in a reasonable manner that is customary in similar corporate

l4 environments,
15

Defendants failed

so as to allow Defendants to effectuate their mission of profitability, with is essential

to their future success.

51.

Plaintiff is informed and believes and thereon alleges that Defendants engaged in

17

unlawful, unfair, and deceptive business practices, including concealing sexual harassment, abuse and

18

molestation claims so as to retain parishioners and patrons

of Defendants' services, including

I9 educational services for parents and youth, who were not apprised of such illicit sexual misconduct
20

2I
22
23

by Defendants' employees and agents, including Kowalewski.

52. By engaging in unlawful,

unfair, and deceptive business practices,

Defendants

benefitted financially to the detriment of its competitors, which comply with the law.

53.

Unless restrained, Defendants

will

continue to engage in the unfair acts and business

24

practices described above, resulting in great and irreparable harm to Plaintiff and/or others similarly

25

situated participants and parishioners.

26

54.

Pursuant

to section 17203 of the California Business and

Professions Code and

27

available equitable powers, Plaintiff is entitled to a preliminary and permanent injunction, enjoining

28

Defendants from continuing the unlawful, unfair and deceptive business practices described above.

-9COMPLAINT AND DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL

 I

In addition, Plaintiff is entitled to recover reasonable attorneys' fees pursuant to California Business

2

and Professions Code and section

.5 of the California Code of

Civil Procedure.

PRAYER FOR RELIEF

J

4

l02l

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff prays for the following relief against Defendants:

5

1.

For past, present and future general damages in an amount to be determined at trial;

6

2.

For past, present and future special damages, including but not limited to past, present and

future lost eamings, economic damages and others in an amount to be determined at trial;

7
8

3. Any appropriate

9

4.

statutory damages;

For cost of suit;

l0

5. For interest as allowed

11

6.

t2

7. Plaintiff

by law;

For any appropriate punitive of exemplary damages;
reserves her right, pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure sections 425.14,1o seek

13

leave of Court via noticed motion to pursue an appropriate award of punitive damages

t4

against Defendant;

15

8.

t6

I]

as

allowable by law;

9.

For injunctive relief, enjoining Defendants from continuing the unlawful, unfair and
deceptive business practices; and

18

t9

For attorney's fees pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 1021.5or otherwise

10. For such other and further relief as the Court may deem proper.

20

2l

DATED:

IuLy

22,2019

JEFF ANDERSON & ASSOCIATES

22
23

24

MICHAEL G. FINNEGAN
JENNIFER E. STEIN
Attorneys for Plaintiff

25

26
27
28

-10COMPLAINT AND DEMAND FORJURY TRIAL

 I
2

DEMAND FOR TRIAL
Plaintiff hereby demands

a

trial by jury in this matter.

J

4

DATED: Iuly22,2019

JEFF ANDERSON & ASSOCIATES

5

6

7
8

MI
MICHAEL

G. FINNEGAN
JENNIFER E. STEIN
Attorneys for Plaintiff

9

l0
11

t2

l3
t4
15

I6
t7

l8

l9
20

2l
22
23

24
25

26
27
28

- ll COMPLAINT AND DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL