John T.B. Doe v. Salesians of Don Bosco, et al.

Doe v. Salesians of Don Bosco · United States District Court for the Middle District of Louisiana · January 22, 2026 · No. 22-840-RLB

Summary

The court denied the defendant’s motion to stay proceedings or dismiss the action under Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 12(b)(7) and 19 for failure to join the Roman Catholic Church for the Archdiocese of New Orleans. The court held that the Archdiocese was not a required party because complete relief could be accorded between the existing parties and because potential contribution, indemnity, or comparative-fault issues did not require joinder. The court further concluded that, even if joinder were required but infeasible due to the Archdiocese’s bankruptcy proceeding, the action should proceed among the existing parties.

Court
United States District Court for the Middle District of Louisiana
Writing for the Court
Richard L. Bourgeois, Jr.
Jurisdiction
United States District Court for the Middle District of Louisiana
Decision date
January 22, 2026
Docket number
22-840-RLB
Procedural posture
Defendant moved under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(7) and Rule 19 to stay or dismiss the plaintiff's Louisiana child-sex-abuse tort action for failure to join the Roman Catholic Church for the Archdiocese of New Orleans as a required party. The court denied the motion.
Standard of review
A Rule 12(b)(7) motion requires a two-step Rule 19 inquiry: first, whether the absent person is required to be joined if feasible under Rule 19(a); and, if joinder is infeasible, whether the action should proceed or be dismissed under Rule 19(b). The party advocating joinder bears the initial burden of showing that the absent party is required.
Precedential value
unknown
Parties
Salesians of Don Bosco, et al. v. John T.B. Doe
Disposition
other

Topics

joindermotions to dismissbankruptcycivil procedurepersonal injury

Practice areas

civil procedurebankruptcytorts

Questions Presented

  1. Whether the Archdiocese of New Orleans was a required party under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 19(a)(1)(A) because the court could not accord complete relief among Doe and the Salesians in the Archdiocese's absence.
  2. Whether the Archdiocese was a required party under Rule 19(a)(1)(B) because it claimed an interest that could be impaired or could expose the Salesians to multiple or inconsistent obligations if the Archdiocese were not joined.
  3. If the Archdiocese were a required party but joinder were infeasible because of its bankruptcy and plan protections, whether Rule 19(b) required dismissal rather than allowing the action to proceed among the existing parties.
  4. Whether the proceedings should be stayed because the Archdiocese was a Chapter 11 debtor and a potentially jointly liable tortfeasor.

Holdings

  1. The Archdiocese was not a required party because the court could accord complete relief between Doe and the Salesians without joining the Archdiocese. Potential contribution, indemnity, comparative-fault evidence, or joint-and-several liability did not require joinder of the absent tortfeasor.
  2. The Archdiocese was not a required party under Rule 19(a)(1)(B) because the Salesians failed to show that the Archdiocese had a direct and immediate interest that would be impaired by the litigation or that the Salesians faced a substantial risk of double, multiple, or inconsistent obligations without the Archdiocese.
  3. Even assuming the Archdiocese were a required party and joinder were infeasible, the action should proceed among the existing parties rather than be dismissed under Rule 19(b).
  4. The Archdiocese's Chapter 11 bankruptcy did not require a stay of the action against the nondebtor Salesians.

Key quotations

Rule 19 does not require the joinder of joint tortfeasors (Rule 19(a) analysis)
It is the threat of inconsistent obligations not multiple litigation that is the concern of Federal Rule 19(a). (Rule 19(a)(1)(B)(ii) analysis)
Defendant’s Motion to Stay Proceedings or Dismiss for Failure to Include Necessary Party (R. Doc. 33) is DENIED. (Conclusion)

Factual background

John T.B. Doe alleges that he was sexually abused in 1974-1975 while he was a freshman at Archbishop Shaw High School by Father Sean Leo Rooney, a Salesian priest and teacher. Doe alleges that the Salesians of Don Bosco assigned Rooney to the school and was responsible for his supervision, oversight, management, retention, and control, and that the organization knew or should have known of Rooney's sexual interest in children. Doe seeks recovery under Louisiana tort law against the Salesians and a fictitious insurer. The Archdiocese of New Orleans, which allegedly owned and operated the school and employed Rooney, was in Chapter 11 bankruptcy and was not joined.

Procedural history

Plaintiff filed the action in Louisiana state court on March 31, 2022, and Defendant removed it to the Middle District of Louisiana on October 27, 2022 based on diversity jurisdiction. The case was stayed and administratively closed by consent while Louisiana courts considered the constitutionality of legislation reviving claims for sexual abuse of minors; the stay was lifted after the Louisiana Supreme Court upheld the legislation. Defendant's earlier Rule 12(b)(6) motion based on prescription was denied. The court then considered and denied the Rule 12(b)(7) and Rule 19 motion concerning the Archdiocese.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…