In the Matter of Roman Catholic Archbishop of Portland in Oregon

The Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Portland in Oregon (debtor) (archdiocese) was subject to multiple tort suits seeking damages for clergy members’ sexual abuse of children. The archdiocese filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy. The bankruptcy judge scheduled mediation between the tort claimants and the archdiocese to settle the tort claims. The claimants sought discovery. During discovery, the bankruptcy judge ordered the archdiocese to produce priests’ personnel files. The judge simultaneously issued an agreed protective order stating that no personnel file would be publicly disclosed unless the claimants first gave notice to counsel for the archdiocese and the relevant priest. Counsel could then move for continuation of the protective order for good cause under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure (FCRP) 26. Personnel files for Father M and Father D were among those produced. Neither priest was sued by any tort claimant. However, their files revealed allegations of prior sexual abuse. The tort claimants eventually sought public disclosure of produced documents, including Father M’s and Father D’s files. The priests moved for a continuation of the protective order. They first argued good cause should be presumed because they were not parties to the underlying proceeding. They then argued that even if there was no presumption, good cause nevertheless existed. Father M, a practicing priest, argued that disclosure would end his career and ruin his life. Father D, who was 85 and retired, argued that disclosure would ruin his reputation, lose him his retirement residence, and be detrimental to his health. The bankruptcy judge denied the motion, holding that the public interest in the files’ disclosure outweighed the priests’ privacy interests. The district court affirmed, and the priests and archdiocese appealed to the Ninth Circuit.