By Dan Horn
The Cincinnati Enquirer

The Archdiocese of Cincinnati's $3 million settlement fund for clergy abuse victims was challenged in court Friday as an attempt to short-change victims.

Five Cincinnati men who claim priests abused them as children asked a Hamilton County judge to block creation of the fund until the church turns over decades of records related to clergy abuse.

Without those records, the men say, it is impossible for victims of abuse to make informed decisions about whether they should seek compensation from the fund or take their chances in court with individual lawsuits.

The archdiocese requires people making claims to the fund to first drop any pending lawsuits against the church.

The legal challenge Friday is the first attempt by victims and their lawyers to block the settlement, which several victims have described as unfair.

"They are putting the lowest amount of money on the table that they can," said Janet Abaray, the attorney for the five men. "The people involved had no say in this process, and that's the problem."

The archdiocese agreed to establish the settlement fund as part of a plea deal with Hamilton County prosecutors in November. The deal ended a two-year criminal investigation and resulted in a conviction against the archdiocese for failing to report abuse allegations.

Prosecutors and church officials defended the settlement fund Friday as a fair and reasonable way to assist victims who might otherwise be unable to prove decades-old cases of abuse.

"We wanted to provide some type of compensation for victims whose claims were barred by the statute of limitations," said Prosecutor Mike Allen. "It's ironic we're now being criticized for that."

Abaray asked Common Pleas Judge Richard Niehaus, who presided over the plea agreement, to delay the creation of the fund and order the church to disclose records.

The judge said he is unsure he has jurisdiction in the case because the plea agreement presented in court did not include the settlement fund.

Church lawyer Mark VanderLaan said Abaray's claim has "no merit whatsoever."

"If her clients wish to pursue remedies in court, they are free to do so," VanderLaan said.