Sovereign Immunity

AuthorInternational Law Group, PLLC
Pages35-38

Page 35

John Doe (Plaintiff) filed a lawsuit in Oregon district court against the Archdiocese of Portland, Oregon (Archdiocese), the Catholic Bishop of Chicago (Chicago Bishop), and the Order of the Friar Servants (Order), alleging that Father Andrew Ronan, a priest in the Archdiocese and a member of the Order sexually abused him when he was 15 or 16 years old. According to the complaint, after sexually abusing boys in other locations, the Holy See (Defendant) and the Order "placed" Ronan as a parish priest at St. Albert's Church in Portland, Oregon. Ronan was Plaintiff's "priest, counselor and spiritual advisor," and later allegedly used that position to perform sexual acts with Plaintiff.

Plaintiff's causes of action against the chief Defendant are: (1) vicarious liability for the actions of the Defendant's instrumentalities; (2) respondeat superior liability for the actions of Ronan, the Defendant's employee; and (3) direct liability for the Defendant's negligent retention and supervision of Ronan and its negligent failure to warn Plaintiff of Ronan's proclivities. The Defendant claimed sovereign immunity and moved to dismiss.

The district court disagreed and found that it had jurisdiction over almost all of Plaintiff's claims based on the FSIA's tortious act exception to sovereign immunity. The Defendant noted its appeal. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, in a per curiam opinion, affirms in part and reverses in part.

The Court concludes that Plaintiff has not alleged enough facts to overcome the presumption Page 36 of separate juridical status for governmental instrumentalities, and thus the law cannot attribute the negligent acts of those entities to the Defendant for jurisdictional purposes. Thus, Plaintiff's claims of vicarious liability cannot proceed. Plaintiff has sufficiently alleged that Ronan was an employee of the Defendant acting within the "scope of his employment" under Oregon law, and thus Ronan's acts can be attributed to the Defendant for jurisdictional purposes under respondeat superior liability.

Furthermore, Ronan's alleged acts came within the FSIA's tortious act exception, and the Defendant is thus not immune from suit for the respondeat superior cause of action. Plaintiff's negligence claims under the FSIA's tortious act exception, however, cannot proceed because the FSIA preserves immunity for discretionary acts. The Court thus may not adjudicate Plaintiff's allegations under the FSIA "commercial activity" exception.

The Circuit Court then determines which acts the law may attribute to the Defendant for jurisdictional purposes. Plaintiff alleges that Defendant created the following institutions: the Archdiocese, the Order and the Bishop. The Defendant argues that Plaintiff failed to allege enough facts to overcome the presumption of the separate juridical status of those institutions.

While the Court agrees with the Defendant...

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT