Hendrickson v. Saint Joseph Roman Catholic Church

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

JOHN POKALSKY

MEMORANDU M AN D ORDER

Plaintiff,

-against- Case Nos.: 23-CV-4786, 23-CV-4887,

23-CV-4974, 23-CV-5091, 23-CV-

PARISH OF SAINT RAPHAEL 5190, 23-CV-5376

and SAINT RAPHAEL ROMAN

CATHOLIC CHURCH,

Defendants.

BLOCK, Senior District Judge:

In each of these six actions, Plaintiffs allege childhood sexual abuse by

persons associated with the Roman Catholic Diocese of Rockville Centre (“the

Diocese”). The Defendants, which are owned and operated by the Diocese,

removed these actions from New York state court to the Eastern District of New

York. The Plaintiffs have each moved to remand back to state court. For the

following reasons, Plaintiffs’ motions are granted.

I. BACKGROUND

In each case, Plaintiff alleged that they suffered childhood sexual abuse by

persons associated with the Diocese. Pursuant to the New York Child Victims Act

(“CVA”) — which reopened the statute of limitations for survivors to pursue

claims based on childhood sexual abuses in 2019 — these and “hundreds of

victims have sued the Diocese and related entities for negligence related to the acts

of sexual abuse allegedly committed by clergymen [and others] working for the

Diocese” in New York state court. See In re Child Victims Act Cases Removed

From State Ct., No. CV 23-5029(GRB), 2023 WL 5123396, at *2 (E.D.N.Y. Aug.

10, 2023) (quoting Roman Cath. Diocese of Rockville Ctr., New York v. Arrowood

Indem. Co., No. 1:20-cv-11011 (JLR), 2022 WL 17593312, at *1 (S.D.N.Y.

2022)).

In response to the hundreds of these actions for childhood sexual abuse, the

Diocese commenced a pending Chapter 11 bankruptcy proceeding in the U.S.

Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York in October 2020. While

the parties consented to a stay of the state court proceedings for several years, the

claimants withdrew their consent in January 2023, and the Bankruptcy Court

ultimately rejected the Diocese’s efforts to continue the stay, reasoning, “[f]or

every day the injunction lasts, [plaintiffs] are not only prevented from pursuing

recovery on their claims, but their ability to prove their underlying case is

weakened.” In re Roman Cath. Diocese of Rockville Ctr., New York, 651 B.R.

622, 666 (Bankr. S.D.N.Y. 2023).

Once the stay was lifted, defendants moved to “immediately remove[]

hundreds of state cases to [the Eastern District of New York],” pursuant to “related

to” jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1334(b). In re Child Victims Act Cases, 2023

WL 5123396, at *3. Judge Brown has characterized this tactic as a “procedural

device[] to scuttle plaintiffs’ opportunity to have their cases heard.” Id. Plaintiffs

have now moved to remand.

II. DISCUSSION

The sole issue before the Court is whether it should mandatorily or

permissively abstain from exercising jurisdiction over these six cases. Fortunately,

this Court proceeds with the benefit of considering thoughtful opinions from my

colleagues on the bench in this District, including Judges Brown and Gonzalez.1

Indeed, per Judge Garaufis’s recent count, courts in this District have already

remanded more than 135 cases back to state courts. See In re Child Victims Act

Cases Removed from State Ct., No. 23-CV-04791, 2023 WL 6050276, at *1

(E.D.N.Y. Sept. 15, 2023).

The federal jurisdiction at issue is 28 U.S.C. § 1334(b), which provides

federal district courts with original, but not exclusive, jurisdiction for civil

proceedings “related to cases under title 11” of the Bankruptcy Code. However,

under so-called “mandatory abstention,” federal courts must abstain from

1 Those opinions are In re Child Victims Act Cases Removed From State Ct., No. CV 23-

5029(GRB), 2023 WL 5123396, (E.D.N.Y. Aug. 10, 2023) (Brown, J.) and In re Child Victims

Act Cases Removed From State Ct., No. 23-CV-04741, 2023 WL 5287067 (E.D.N.Y. Aug. 17,

2023) (Gonzalez, J.). A number of other courts in this District have issued opinions following

theses Judges’ lead and remanding the actions to New York state court.

exercising jurisdiction if proceedings “related to” a pending bankruptcy code

satisfy six elements delineated by 28 U.S.C. § 1334(c)(2). See Parmalat Cap. Fin.

Ltd. v. Bank of Am. Corp., 639 F.3d 572, 579–80 (2d Cir. 2011) (construing

elements).

For the same reasons set forth by Judge Gonzalez in is persuasive opinion

remanding ten similar cases, see In re Child Victims Act Cases, 2023 WL 5287067,

at *6–8 (analyzing the elements under 28 U.S.C. § 1334(c)(2) and Second Circuit

caselaw), the Court concludes that mandatory abstention applies. For the sixth

element, the timeliness of adjudication, the Court finds particularly persuasive the

considerations that New York has provided state courts with resources to timely

adjudicate CVA claims, and that New York courts have developed a body of law

around such claims. Accordingly, mandatory abstention requires the Court to

remand these six actions back to state court.2

III. CONCLUSION

For the foregoing reasons, Plaintiffs’ motions are granted. The Court

remands the following cases back to state court:

2 Following my colleagues’ similar decisions, the Court notes that even if mandatory abstention

were not applicable, the Court would find appropriate either permissive abstention pursuant to 28

U.S.C. § 1334(c)(1), which allows courts to abstain “in the interest of justice, or in the interest of

comity with State courts or respect for State law,” or equitable remand on “any equitable

ground,” pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1452(b).

- ARK387 Doe v. St. Barnabas Apostle, et al., E.D.N.Y. No. 23-CV-4786,

Nassau County Index No. 900091/2021

- Pokalsky v. Parish of Saint Raphael et al., E.D.N.Y. No. 23-CV-4887,

Nassau County Index No. 900139/2021

- Klein v. Parish of St. Thomas More et al., E.D.N.Y. No. 23-CV-4974,

Nassau County Index No. 900386/2021

- Hendrickson v. Saint Joseph Roman Catholic Church et al., E.D.N.Y.

No. 23-CV-5091, Suffolk County Index No., 610938/2021

- Flanagan v. Parish of St. Martin of Tours et al., E.D.N.Y. No. 23-CV-

5190, Nassau County Index No. 900381/2021

- Hartley v. Maria Regina Diocesan High School et al., E.D.N.Y. No. 23-

CV-5376, Nassau County Index No. 900269/2021

SO ORDERED.

_/S/ Frederic Block________________

FREDERIC BLOCK

Senior United States District Judge

Brooklyn, New York

October 5, 2023