Family seeks $5 million in molestation case

The attorney for a family that is suing the town and Board of Education, alleging their son was molested by former Miller-Driscoll paraprofessional Eric Von Kohorn, has put forth a compromise in which the child would receive $5 million and his parents would each receive $150,000.

The proposed deal was submitted by attorney Paul A. Slager to Stamford Superior Court on Sept. 25.

In the case of John Doe PPA, Mother Doe and Father Doe v. Wilton Board of Education and Town of Wilton, Slager submitted separate documents — one for each plaintiff — seeking the compromise. Slager is an attorney with Silver Golub & Teitell, LLP of Stamford. There were no further details available from the court as of Sept. 26.

A complaint involving the boy, John Doe, was filed Oct. 14, 2016. He was 4 during the 2013-14 school year, when the incident is alleged to have occurred. His parents are also plaintiffs.

While at school, the boy was fully toilet trained. Despite that, the complaint alleges, Von Kohorn regularly took the boy alone into the school bathroom, in violation of the school’s toileting policy.

The complaint says that at some point during the winter/spring semester of the 2013-14 school year, Von Kohorn took digital photographs of the boy while his pants were down in the bathroom, resulting in extensive permanent emotional and psychological injuries to the boy.

This occurred after preschool director Fred Rapczynski had been notified of and investigated a 2012 complaint alleging Von Kohorn had sexually molested a girl student in the preschool. Von Kohorn continued to be employed at the school. The girl’s family also sued the town and Board of Education and a settlement was reached earlier this year.

Unrelated to the lawsuit, Von Kohorn was arrested in August 2014 on charges of first-degree possession of child pornogrpahy and promoting a minor in an obscene performance. After pleading guilty to one count of illegal possession of child pornography in the second degree, he was sentenced in October 2015 to six years in prison, suspended after two years, and 10 years probation. He has since been released from prison.

Attorneys representing the town and Board of Education in the latest suit submitted a motion for summary judgment on May 2, claiming the town has immunity from liability for what it says falls under discretionary acts in the performance of public duties. The motion further claims the Board of Education does not owe a duty to the boy’s parents. There has been no ruling on that motion.

At this time, jury selection and trial, originally scheduled for next month, is now scheduled for Feb. 20, 2019.