A Cook County judge ruled Tuesday an alleged sexual abuse victim of a former Roman Catholic priest can pursue punitive damages against the Archdiocese of Chicago if his case makes it to trial.

Cook County Circuit Judge Clare Elizabeth McWilliams ruled Eugene K. Hollander — owner of the Law Offices of Eugene K. Hollander, who represents the case’s John Doe plaintiff — could potentially prove to a jury the defendants either knew of a widespread abuse problem, or did not respond accordingly to the potential danger the priest posed to others.

While Daniel McCormack pleaded guilty in 2007 to molesting five boys and was sentenced to five years in prison, Hollander estimates around 15 cases against McCormack are currently pending before McWilliams.

Some previously-filed cases have settled and other relatively new ones have been filed, he said, but no cases against the former priest have made it all the way to trial.

That could change, however, as the plaintiff’s case against McCormack and the Catholic Bishop of Chicago — the legal name for the archdiocese — approaches its July 22 trial date.

The parties engaged in settlement discussions before arguing John Doe’s motion to amend his suit to add a claim for punitive damages. Hollander said while the discussions led him to believe the parties could settle before the hearing last Tuesday, that didn’t happen.

“At this point, we’re looking forward to trial,” Hollander said. “My client was very pleased with the ruling. He is anxious to have his day in court.”

And although no case has yet made it to trial, Hollander said, the archdiocese could be looking at “tens of millions of damage awards if they were to try these cases.”

McWilliams’ ruling was a significant one, Hollander said — one that poses “serious ramifications” for his client as well as all the other cases pending against the archdiocese for alleged sexual abuse by McCormack, who was promoted to pastor of the parish in September 2000.

“I think a narrow reading would be that it applies to any victim that was sexually abused after September 2000 by McCormack,” he said. “But I think a fair reading of the judge’s order is that any plaintiff who has a pending claim against the Archdiocese of Chicago for sexual abuse by McCormack who was abused after September of 2000 can pursue a punitive damage claim before a jury. I think it would likely apply to any victim after McCormack was ordained in 1994 up until September of 2000 as well.”

However, James C. Geoly, a partner at Burke, Warren, MacKay, & Serritella P.C. who represents the archdiocese, said the judge’s ruling was disappointing and uses the incorrect legal standard.

In simple negligence cases — the category in which Doe’s suit falls before he amends it to include a cause for punitive damages — an employer is liable for an employee’s intentional criminal act if a plaintiff can prove the employer knew or should have known about the particular unfitness that caused the harm.

“In other words, if your employee is accused of sexually abusing a child, the notice required is that he had a propensity to sexually abuse children,” Geoly said. “There was no such notice in this case.”

Claims for punitive damages require a higher level of notice that would require a plaintiff to prove the employer had actual knowledge of the particular unfitness.

That means Doe will have to prove the archdiocese actually knew McCormack would sexually abuse a child for the archdiocese to be subject to punitive damages, and that is the standard Geoly said McWilliams should apply to the case.

“The court explicitly rejected this standard, and we believe that was error,” Geoly said.

Doe filed a lawsuit against the Catholic Bishop of Chicago and McCormack in September 2013, alleging the archdiocese was negligent in hiring, supervising and retaining McCormack — who molested Doe on two separate occasions while he attended school at St. Agatha’s Parish between 2003 and 2004.

Doe alleges the archdiocese knew or should have known McCormack had a propensity to sexually abuse children.

The suit also alleges the archdiocese engaged in willful and wanton conduct by failing to properly investigate McCormack after reports of his inappropriate conduct. The defendant was also willful and wanton, Doe alleges, when it failed to terminate or remove McCormack from the seminary in the face of such reports.

McCormack has not yet filed any pleadings in the case. Hollander said he plans to file the amended complaint sometime next week.

And while the archdiocese’s answer is restricted to preserve the identities of other alleged McCormack victims, Geoly said the archdiocese denies it is liable and denies the allegations against it for the negligence and coming punitive damages claims.

“Regarding the allegations that the abuse actually occurred or didn’t occur, our pleading states that we do not have personal knowledge of that because we weren’t there to witness it,” Geoly said. “But under Illinois law, the plaintiff is required to prove it, and we will require them to prove it.”

The case is John Doe v. The Catholic Bishop of Chicago, et al., 13 L 9901.