Commonwealth Court Decision Clarifies Scope of Sexual Abuse Exception

The Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania issued a decision of significant statewide importance on June 9, 2025, clarifying the reach of the “sexual abuse exception” to governmental immunity.

Under normal circumstances, state and local government agencies are immune from lawsuits due to the doctrine of governmental immunity. However, Pennsylvania law allows for exceptions—one of which was added in 2019. That year, the legislature created a new waiver of immunity for sexual abuse cases, provided the abuse was “caused by actions or omissions of the local agency which constitute negligence.”

Case Summary: L.F.V. v. South Philadelphia High School

In the case of L.F.V. v. South Philadelphia High School, the plaintiff alleged she was sexually abused by fellow students on school property. According to the lawsuit, the high school failed to provide proper supervision, enabling the abuse to occur.

The school district argued that immunity still applied, claiming the exception only covers abuse committed directly by government employees. However, the plaintiff contended that the exception also applies when government inaction or negligence enabled the abuse—regardless of the perpetrator.

Legislative Intent Matters: Court Agrees with the Plaintiff

The Commonwealth Court sided with the plaintiff. In its ruling, the Court emphasized that the intent of the legislature—especially as voiced by State Representative Mark Rozzi, the bill’s primary sponsor—was to ensure public institutions could be held accountable, just like private ones.

The Court found that Rep. Rozzi’s speeches and advocacy confirmed the law was meant to hold municipalities liable for failing to prevent sexual abuse. As he stated during legislative debate, the goal was to create “absolute parity in the handling of sexual abuse claims between public and private institutions.”

O’Donnell Law Offices Played a Key Role

O’Donnell Law Offices had the distinct honor of representing Rep. Mark Rozzi in this landmark appeal, helping to ensure that the legislative purpose behind the “sexual abuse exception” was correctly recognized and upheld by the Court.