Professional Documents
Culture Documents
MATTHEW STRZEPEK, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
vs. )
)
ROMAN CATHOLIC DIOCESE OF )
SYRACUSE and FELIX COLOSIMO, )
)
Defendants. )
)
Comes now Plaintiff Matthew Strzepek, by counsel, and makes his Complaint for
Damages. Plaintiff demands that this matter by tried by a jury.
PARTIES
1. Plaintiff MATTHEW STRZEPEK is a citizen of the State of California.
2. At all relevant times, Plaintiff was a minor born July 9, 1975.
3. Defendant ROMAN CATHOLIC DIOCESE OF SYRACUSE (DIOCESE) is,
and at all relevant times was, a corporation incorporated under the laws of the State of New
York and at all relevant times was a citizen of the State of New York.
4. Defendant FELIX R. COLOSIMO (COLOSIMO) is a competent adult and at
all relevant times was citizen of the State of New York.
5. At all relevant times, defendant COLOSIMO was a Roman Catholic Priest.
6. At all relevant times COLOSIMO was the agent, servant and/or employee of
defendant DIOCESE.
Page 1
Case 3:17-cv-00906-AVC Document 1 Filed 06/02/17 Page 2 of 12
JURISDICTION
7. Jurisdiction is based on diversity of citizenship pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Section 1332.
8. The matter in controversy exceeds, exclusive of interest and costs, the sum of
$75,000.00.
9. Connecticut law applies as the rapes occurred in Connecticut.
Page 2
Case 3:17-cv-00906-AVC Document 1 Filed 06/02/17 Page 3 of 12
38. Upon information and belief, the DIOCESE has not turned this video recording
over to law enforcement.
Page 3
Case 3:17-cv-00906-AVC Document 1 Filed 06/02/17 Page 4 of 12
39. The whereabouts of the video recording Matthew gave the DIOCESE are not
known at the time of filing.
40. As of the date of this filing, COLOSIMO is still an active priest performing
weddings, funerals, and occasional masses for the DIOCESE.
CAUSES OF ACTION
COUNT I: ASSAULT
(Against COLOSIMO and DIOCESE)
41. Plaintiff re-alleges and incorporates by reference the foregoing paragraphs as if
fully set forth herein.
42. By virtue of the relationship between DIOCESE, COLOSIMO and
plaintiff/plaintiffs parents, defendants owed a duty of care to avoid causing harm to plaintiff
while he was entrusted to their care.
43. At all relevant times, defendant DIOCESE knew that, as a parish priest, defendant
COLOSIMO would be interacting with children in the churches to which he was assigned and
providing various pastoral services to them.
44. At the time of Matthews abuse in Connecticut, in the fall of 1987, the general
risk of harm or injuries of the type suffered by the plaintiff was foreseeable by the defendants
under the circumstances herein set forth.
45. Following the rapes in 1987, COLOSIMO continued to sexually abused and/or
exploited the then-minor plaintiff, Matthew Strzepek until sometime in 1990.
46. Matthew was abused at various locations across the Northeastern United States,
including in the State of Connecticut.
47. The abuse occurred on trips promoted, planned, sponsored, and/or paid for by
defendant DIOCESE and occurred in hotels and motels in the States of Connecticut,
Pennsylvania, New Jersey and Massachusetts.
48. Due to the circumstances of the abuse (perpetrated by a man of the cloth while
under the authority of the Church) and the mental trauma incurred by those circumstances,
Plaintiff could not reasonably appreciate that he had been harmed by Defendants conduct due
to, inter alia, the escape mechanism of dissociation, until within the year preceding the filing of
Page 4
Case 3:17-cv-00906-AVC Document 1 Filed 06/02/17 Page 5 of 12
this Complaint.
49. As a result of the abuse, Plaintiff suffered injuries of a serious and permanent
nature, in the form of both physical injuries and severe emotional injuries, including but not
limited to, panic attacks, emotional distress, anxiety, frustration, disassociation, post-traumatic
stress disorder, and permanent psychological scarring, which injuries were exacerbated and
intensified by lack of timely treatment.
50. As a result of the abuse, Plaintiff incurred medical bills for his care and treatment,
and he may continue to incur additional expense in the future.
51. In addition, Matthew, who was baptized and confirmed Roman Catholic, has
suffered an emotional and spiritual loss.
52. The injuries and damages Matthew sustained were the result of the acts and
intentions of defendant COLOSIMO, in that he sexually abused and sexually exploited the
plaintiff while he was a minor.
53. The aforementioned conduct and acts occurred while defendant COLOSIMO was
acting as a priest supervising and chaperoning minors in his capacity as a priest under the
auspices of defendant DIOCESE.
54. The aforementioned conduct and acts occurred while defendant COLOSIMO was
acting as a priest supervising and chaperoning minors who were his parishioners, cloaking his
conduct with and through the sacraments of the church, all of which were in the scope of his
employment for which defendant DIOCESE is vicariously liable.
Page 5
Case 3:17-cv-00906-AVC Document 1 Filed 06/02/17 Page 6 of 12
Page 6
Case 3:17-cv-00906-AVC Document 1 Filed 06/02/17 Page 7 of 12
Page 7
Case 3:17-cv-00906-AVC Document 1 Filed 06/02/17 Page 8 of 12
75. As a result, a unique degree of trust and confidence developed between defendant
Page 8
Case 3:17-cv-00906-AVC Document 1 Filed 06/02/17 Page 9 of 12
DIOCESE and Plaintiff, as Plaintiff was taught to respect and defer, and did so defer, to the
authority of its clergy and priests.
76. Plaintiff relied upon and trusted defendant DIOCESEs superior position,
knowledge, expertise and skill and was justified in doing so.
77. Defendant DIOCESE stood in a fiduciary relationship with Plaintiff.
78. The injuries set forth herein suffered by Plaintiff are the proximate result of
defendant DIOCESEs breach of duty arising out of its fiduciary and confidential relationship
with plaintiff in one or more of the following ways:
a. in that it failed to adequately evaluate the mental fitness of defendant
COLOSIMO to serve in his capacity as a priest with its related responsibilities
to parishioners and others;
b. in that it failed to periodically evaluate the mental fitness of defendant
COLOSIMO to continue to serve in his capacity as a priest;
c. in that it failed to adequately supervise defendant COLOSIMO in his
interaction and conduct towards parishioners and, in particular, minor
children;
d. in that it failed to provide training and/or educational programs to defendant
COLOSIMO to inform him of proper conduct toward parishioners;
e. in that it induced the Catholic Faithful to entrust their childrens moral and
spiritual well-being and safety to its priests and then failed to protect these
children, including the minor plaintiff, from sexual abuse by agents, servants
or employees of defendant DIOCESE including defendant COLOSIMO; and
f. in that it failed to police activities of its priests and, in particular, defendant
COLOSIMO, including its failure to provide or enforce a prohibition on
clergy being unchaperoned with minor parishioners.
Page 9
Case 3:17-cv-00906-AVC Document 1 Filed 06/02/17 Page 10 of 12
COUNT IV:
(Against Defendant DIOCESE)
FRAUD
79. Plaintiff re-alleges and incorporates by reference the foregoing paragraphs as if fully
set forth herein.
80. In stating that it found plaintiffs claims to be credible, promising to pay for
counseling upon plaintiffs release of his counseling records, and falsely representing to plaintiff
that COLOSIMO would no longer be a Catholic priest, DIOCESE intended to induce plaintiff to
believe that it cared about his well-being and wanted to rectify the damage done to him by
COLOSIMO. It also intended to induce plaintiff to relinquish to it his physical proof of his
sexual abuse, the recording.
81. Plaintiff was ignorant of the true facts, which were that COLOSIMO was still a priest
and that DIOCESE intended to destroy or otherwise conceal plaintiffs evidence to protect itself
from plaintiffs claims herein.
82. Plaintiff reasonably relied upon DIOCESEs indication of intent to help him rather
than hurt him, in that it had provided him some counseling.
83. Plaintiff was injured by the fraud perpetrated by DIOCESE; defendant betrayed his
trust, destroyed or concealed his evidence, and maintained COLOSIMO in its employ/service
conveying thereby a denial of plaintiffs injuries sustained as a result of COLOSIMOs abuse.
84. As a legal result of the foregoing, Plaintiff endured emotional pain and suffering,
such as angst, frustration, depression, and worry, as well as deprivation of important proof of his
claims, all to plaintiffs special and general damages.
85. As a legal result of the foregoing, plaintiff claims punitive damages, as hereinbefore
alleged.
Page 10
Case 3:17-cv-00906-AVC Document 1 Filed 06/02/17 Page 11 of 12
Respectfully submitted,
Page 11
Case 3:17-cv-00906-AVC Document 1 Filed 06/02/17 Page 12 of 12
Page 12