Opinion ID: 3216318
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Reliance on John BBB Doe v. Archdiocese of

Text: Milwaukee12 in a medical malpractice case ¶26 John BBB Doe involved seven cases alleging that priests in the Milwaukee Archdiocese sexually assaulted the minor victims. Id., 212 Wis. 2d 312, 318, 565 N.W.2d 94 (1997). The issue involved determining the date on which the victims discovered or should have in the exercise of reasonable diligence discovered that the sexual abuse caused injury. Id. at 318-19. We held that a victim of this clergy sexual abuse either discovered or should have discovered that he or she was 11 This does not leave the Does without a remedy. Pursuant to Wis. Stat. § 893.587, the Does have claims for sexual assault that are not barred until they are 35 years old. See id. (Sexual assault of a child; limitation. An action to recover damages for injury caused by an act that would constitute a violation of s. 948.02, 948.025, 948.06, 948.085, or 948.095 or would create a cause of action under s. 895.442 shall be commenced before the injured party reaches the age of 35 years or be barred.) As explained in footnote 9, the Does' sexual battery claim is still pending. 12 See John BBB Doe v. Archdiocese of Milwaukee, 211 Wis. 2d 312, 565 N.W.2d 94 (1997). 18 No. 2014AP1177 injured at the time of the alleged sexual assaults or by the last date of the alleged multiple assaults. Id. ¶27 The circuit court in this case applied John BBB Doe to Does 56 and 57's claims to conclude that both boys either discovered or should have discovered that they were injured on the date of the last inappropriate genital exam. The court of appeals in this case also applied John BBB Doe to conclude that the Does' negligence claims against Mayo Clinic accrued at the time of the touching. See John Doe 56 v. Mayo Clinic Health Sys.-Eau Claire Clinic, Inc., No. 2014AP1177, unpublished slip