## Facts

- The Roman Catholic Archbishop of Portland in Oregon (RCAP) filed a Chapter 11 case after facing many tort claims alleging clergy sexual abuse based on conduct that occurred before the bankruptcy filing.
- On November 19, 2004, the Bankruptcy Court for the District of Oregon authorized appointment of a future claims representative (FCR) to represent child-abuse victims whose claims arose from RCAP’s prepetition conduct but who could not effectively appear and protect their interests during the case.
- After the FCR’s appointment, RCAP and the tort claimants’ committee disputed the definition of the “future claimants” group the FCR would represent.
- RCAP argued for a narrow definition limited to (1) minors and (2) adults who had repressed memories of abuse and might later recover those memories.
- The tort claimants’ committee argued the class should also include people who remember the abuse but, even using reasonable care, could not yet discover the resulting harm (or the connection between the abuse and the harm) in time to assert a claim during the Chapter 11 case.
- The court was asked to set the scope of the FCR’s constituency so the case could proceed with a representative structure that accounts for both current and later-asserted abuse-related demands tied to prepetition conduct.

## Issues

1. Who qualifies as a “future claimant” for purposes of representation by a court-appointed future claims representative in RCAP’s Chapter 11 case?
2. Is the FCR’s constituency limited to minors and victims with repressed memories, or does it also include victims who remember the abuse but cannot reasonably discover resulting harm during the bankruptcy case?

## Decision

- The court rejected RCAP’s proposed limitation of the future-claimant group to minors and repressed-memory victims.
- The court held that the FCR’s constituency also includes individuals who remember the abuse but, despite reasonable care, are not yet able to discover the resulting harm (or its causal connection to the abuse) in time to participate meaningfully in the Chapter 11 process.
- The court therefore set a broader class of future claimants for whom the FCR would act in the reorganization case.

## Legal Principles

- In a Chapter 11 case used to address large numbers of tort liabilities, the court may appoint a future claims representative to protect people whose rights may be affected by the plan but who cannot practically assert or defend those rights during the case.
- The future-claimant category is not confined to victims who lack memory of the underlying conduct; it can include victims who know the events but cannot reasonably discover the resulting injury, its cause, or the legal significance of the injury until later.
- When a plan may bind people who are absent from the process, fairness and due process concerns support defining the FCR’s constituency to cover reasonably foreseeable, prepetition-based claims that may be asserted after confirmation.

## Conclusion

In RCAP’s Chapter 11 case, the bankruptcy court set the scope of the future claims representative’s constituency and held that “future claimants” include not only minors and repressed-memory victims, but also people who recall the abuse yet cannot, despite reasonable care, discover the resulting harm (or its connection to the abuse) in time to participate during the bankruptcy case.


In Re Roman Catholic Archbishop of Portland, 2005 Bankr. LEXIS 42 (2005)