OAKLAND (CA)
East Bay Times [Walnut Creek CA]
October 6, 2026
By Jakob Rodgers
The ruling comes as several more abuse cases near trial
A federal judge has slammed the door on a controversial plan by the Roman Catholic Diocese of Oakland to emerge from bankruptcy, which had garnered the near-unanimous opposition of hundreds of people claiming decades of abuse at the hands of local priests.
Judge William J. Lafferty III on Friday found the Oakland diocese failed to put forward an adequate plan during a recent monthslong trial that would allow it to emerge from Chapter 11 bankruptcy proceedings, which have dragged on since 2023. In doing so, the judge dismissed a suggestion by the diocese that its status as a religious entity allowed it to be treated differently in bankruptcy proceedings — opining that being a church “doesn’t make it a religious entity worthy of special protections, it makes it a debtor.”
The ruling — issued in a 109-page decision Friday — found that aspects of the church’s liquidation plan were “structured in a manner that tilts the playing field” in its favor at every turn. The judge also aired concerns that the diocese had “not accurately set forth all of the assets and the debts that should be included” in one key liquidation analysis.
The judge suggested the diocese go back to the negotiating table with some 350 people who sued the church in recent years, each claiming abuse by its priests. Those talks have proven contentious, with 97% of those abuse victims voting against the diocese’s most recent settlement proposal earlier this year.
On Monday, an attorney for several of the victims hailed the judge’s decision as “very well reasoned, thoughtful and complete.” In doing so, the attorney also slammed the diocese’s bid to seek approval of a plan against the fervent opposition of so many people claiming abuse, calling the tactic “certainly not good religious practice — it’s a total abdication of responsibility.”
“It’s the kinds of things you’d think the mob would do, not a bishop who owes certain responsibilities to children who were sexually assaulted by priests in his employment,” said the attorney, Rick Simons.
In a statement issued to his parishioners, Bishop Michael Barber quoted multiple Bible verses while declaring that “our efforts to find justice for survivors and to preserve our sacred mission will continue.
“While this is a setback, we remain committed to providing fair and equitable treatment for the survivors, and to continuing our mission to proclaim the Gospel of Jesus Christ in service to the 500,000 faithful Catholics in our community,” Barber’s statement said.
The ruling comes just weeks ahead of jury selection in the second of six so-called “bellwether” cases against the diocese, which were allowed to proceed toward trial after years of plodding settlement talks between the church and the hundreds of parishioners suing it. The first such case ended in April with a $16 million judgment against the diocese amid claims that a former priest — Stephen Kiesle — twice molested a former Union City altar boy in the 1970s.
Four additional trials are scheduled to begin in December, January, February and March. The rest of the civil cases against the diocese remain on hold while the diocese works its way through Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection.
The ruling also comes as multiple other dioceses across California reach settlement agreements of their own, amid a wave of claims brought under a state law that temporarily lifted the statute of limitations on lawsuits targeting sexual predators. In June, for example, the Archdiocese of San Francisco agreed to pay $395 million to more than 500 abuse victims, while also agreeing to a host of whistleblower protections and a bill of rights for abuse victims.
Lafferty’s ruling last week largely focused on a proposed $172.3 million payout by the Oakland diocese to local abuse survivors — a figure that includes $30 million from a related corporation overseeing the diocese’s schools. East Bay abuse victims have demanded significantly more money, with one court filing earlier this year seeking $314.1 million from the diocese and its education-based corporation.
In his ruling, Lafferty dismissed a claim from abuse victims that the diocese had been acting in bad faith — an allegation rooted in the belief that the diocese had been choosing not to offer more money, despite concerns that it could.
Still, the judge raised numerous questions about the diocese’s plan, including how it valued properties that it planned to sell off, as well as the means by which it planned to do so. At one point, the judge in his ruling lamented a “frustrating and unhelpful” approach by the diocese of pushing back on any suggestions about which properties it should close as “a burden and impermissible intrusion” on the church’s religious freedom.
In a statement, another attorney for several abuse victims seized on the judge’s criticism — suggesting that the ruling marked “a triumphant turn rewarding the persistent courage of the survivors.”
“Now, hopefully, we can work with the bishop to bring speedy justice to the suffering,” said the attorney, Jeff Anderson.
Jakob Rodgers is a senior breaking news reporter. Call, text or send him an encrypted message via Signal at 510-390-2351, or email him at jrodgers@bayareanewsgroup.com.