California Catholic diocese bankruptcies: where the six cases stand

Legal accuracy check

Chris Schroeder, Esq.

Florida Bar #520381 · D.C. Bar

First published October 5, 2026 · Last checked October 5, 2026

How pages are checked

The six cases side by side

Status as of October 5, 2026, from each court’s docket or its official claims agent. “None found” means no court record giving a count was located. Some dioceses and survivors’ committees publish counts of their own, and this table leaves those out.

Who may be able to file

In all six cases the deadline for filing a proof of claim has passed. A bar date is the cutoff a bankruptcy court sets for anyone with a claim against the debtor, and against a diocese in Chapter 11 it governs abuse claims against that diocese in place of the ordinary state deadline. People who filed before it are claimants in the case. In San Francisco, the court approved a ballot form and voting procedures on August 24, 2026, the groundwork for claimants to vote on the plan.

A missed bar date is not always final. The San Francisco court entered orders on August 25 and September 1, 2026 allowing late claims brought to it by motion. Whether any other late claim would be allowed is for the court in each case to decide, on that claim’s facts.

Some claims reach past the diocese itself. In Santa Rosa, the diocese’s August 26, 2026 status report says Hanna Boys Center is a co-defendant in about 54 abuse cases. Which entity a claim is against (a diocese, a parish, a school, a religious order) can change which court and which deadline apply. Our Catholic dioceses page explains why that question comes first.

Adult survivors are on a separate track. California’s AB 250 window, described in the next section, revives some adult sexual assault claims against private entities through December 31, 2027. How that window interacts with a diocesan bar date that has already passed is not addressed in the records reviewed for this page.

Nothing here can say whether a particular person has a claim. A confidential case review can, and our guides explain what filing involves and how filing without your name works.

Deadlines that apply

Four California rules bear on these cases. Two of them are windows that are open now.

AB 218: the childhood window that produced the claims

AB 218 opened a window for childhood sexual abuse claims that had already expired under the old deadlines. It closed on December 31, 2022. The suits filed in it are what these bankruptcies are about. The Archdiocese of San Francisco describes its settlement as being “for survivors of sexual abuse associated with California Assembly Bill 218,” and the Diocese of Oakland describes the suits against it as AB 218 lawsuits. The same law drove the Los Angeles County juvenile facilities settlement.

AB 452: no time limit going forward

For childhood sexual assault arising on or after January 1, 2024, AB 452 removed the time limit. It does not reach earlier abuse.

AB 250: the adult window, open until December 31, 2027

AB 250 (Stats. 2025, ch. 682) amended Code of Civil Procedure section 340.16, effective January 1, 2026. Under subdivision (e), adult sexual assault claims that were otherwise barred before January 1, 2026 may be commenced between January 1, 2026 and December 31, 2027. The window has limits written into it:

• A revived claim against an entity must allege that the entity “engaged in a cover up or attempted a cover up of a previous instance or allegations of sexual assault by an alleged perpetrator.”
• Claims against public entities are not revived.
• Claims litigated to finality, or settled in writing, before January 1, 2026 are not revived.

Subdivision (b)(3): the AB 2777 window, closing December 31, 2026

A separate, older track sits in the same section. Subdivision (b)(3) covers claims based on conduct on or after January 1, 2009, commenced on or after January 1, 2019, that were barred only because the limitations period had run. Those claims may be commenced until December 31, 2026. The two windows are different, with different closing dates, and they should not be confused.

Against a diocese in Chapter 11, the bar date is the deadline that controls a claim against the diocese itself, even while a state window is open. Our statute of limitations guide covers the general California rules.

What the claims allege

The claims in these six cases are allegations of childhood sexual abuse associated with each diocese, filed in California state court and halted when the diocese entered Chapter 11. This site does not name accused priests. Many of the claims concern conduct decades old: in its June 13, 2024 release, the Diocese of San Diego said about 60 percent of the claims filed against it in 2023 allege conduct 50 or more years earlier. In Sacramento, the age of claims is itself being litigated. According to the diocese’s September 21, 2026 status report, a writ petition in the coordinated state-court proceeding, JCCP 5108, concerning Proposition 51 and claims of abuse before 1986, is pending in the Second District Court of Appeal.

Apart from the one Oakland jury verdict described below, no court in the records reviewed has made a finding on the underlying allegations, and each claim remains an allegation until one does. None of the six dioceses’ responses to specific allegations appears in those records. The positions each diocese has stated about its bankruptcy are quoted in its section.

Settlement and compensation status

In a diocesan Chapter 11, abuse claims are generally paid through a survivors’ trust funded by the diocese, related entities and insurers, under a plan the bankruptcy court must confirm. Our Boy Scouts of America page shows how a bankruptcy trust handles abuse claims, and settlements and compensation covers how payment works. The six cases are at very different stages. This page gives aggregate figures only, each with its date and source, and it does not estimate what any claim is worth.

Archdiocese of San Francisco

The Roman Catholic Archbishop of San Francisco filed on August 21, 2023, No. 23-30564 (DM), before Judge Dennis Montali in the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Northern District of California. By order entered November 21, 2023 (Dkt. 337), proofs of claim, including the Confidential Survivor Supplement, were due on or before February 20, 2024.

On June 29, 2026 the archdiocese announced “an agreement in principle to a financial settlement proposal of $395 million for survivors of sexual abuse associated with California Assembly Bill 218.” That figure comes from the archdiocese’s own release; the plan text behind it was not available to confirm it. Counsel for the survivors’ committee says the agreement also carries child-protection terms the bankruptcy court can enforce. Archbishop Salvatore J. Cordileone said: “We believe this proposal provides a path toward fair compensation for survivors who have borne the weight of this abuse for a lifetime.”

The plan (Dkt. 1933) and disclosure statement (Dkt. 1934) were filed on September 3, 2026. Minutes of the August 20 hearing set the disclosure statement hearing for October 8, 2026 at 1:30 p.m., in person and by Zoom. A docket entry titled “Continue Hearing” was filed on September 25 (Dkt. 1971), and its text is not public, so the October 8 date may have moved. The court appointed Hamid R. Rafatjoo as unknown claims representative on September 1 (Dkt. 1930). No count of claims from a court record was found as of October 5, 2026.

Diocese of Oakland

The Roman Catholic Bishop of Oakland filed on May 8, 2023, No. 23-40523 (WJL), before Judge William J. Lafferty III in the Northern District of California. An order entered July 25, 2023 (Dkt. 293) set a general bar date of September 11, 2023 and a bar date of November 6, 2023 for governmental units. The court’s October 2026 decision does not state a separate bar date for abuse claims.

A non-binding term sheet was filed on December 11, 2025. The diocese describes it as $200 million over five years from the diocese and the Roman Catholic Welfare Corporation, plus $42.5 million from insurers. On March 27, 2026 the survivors’ committee filed a competing plan proposing $195.2 million from the diocese and $118.9 million from the Welfare Corporation over three and a half years.

On October 2, 2026, in a 109-page decision marked for publication (Dkt. 3548), Judge Lafferty concluded that the diocese “has not presently satisfied the requirements for confirmation” of its Modified Fourth Amended Plan under section 1129(a)(7) of the Bankruptcy Code and, were it applicable, section 1129(b)(2). The plan was not confirmed. The decision recites its terms: $172.3 million in total contributions for the abuse claims class through a Survivors’ Trust, a $30 million commitment from the Welfare Corporation, and a $7.7 million reserve for unknown abuse claims. The judge wrote that the case “has not produced a single penny of recovery for the 345 Abuse Survivors,” and he rejected the argument that the diocese’s religious status changes the standards for confirmation. He also wrote that the shortfalls “arise from failures of proof, not of conception” and that “an alternative plan is realizable.”

The 345 are the abuse claims the diocese, after review, counted as entitled to distributions. No later scheduling order was found on the docket as of October 5, 2026. In a statement on its Chapter 11 page, Bishop Michael C. Barber said: “While today is a setback, we remain committed to providing fair and equitable treatment.”

The decision also records a state-court verdict. On April 22, 2026, a jury in Alameda County Superior Court (Judge Chatterjee) awarded $16 million to a survivor whose complaint was filed on December 30, 2019. That is the result of one trial on one case’s evidence. It says nothing about the value of any other claim.

Diocese of Sacramento

The Roman Catholic Bishop of Sacramento filed on April 1, 2024, No. 24-21326, before Judge Christopher M. Klein in the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Eastern District of California. The bar date was October 1, 2024, according to the court-appointed claims agent, Angeion.

The diocese’s status report of September 21, 2026 (Dkt. 2463) says mediation on September 17 and 18 produced no settlement and that another session was set for September 25. It reports agreements in principle with the Interstate Insurers, Lloyd’s/London Market and Hartford, and states that “agreement between the Debtor and the Committee remains the primary and likely only obstacle.” On a joint application (Dkt. 2492), the court moved the deadline to file a plan from September 30 to October 21, 2026, by order of September 30 (Dkt. 2504).

No plan was on file as of October 5, 2026. A status conference has been requested for October 21, the day a sale of the diocese’s Winters property is set for hearing. The survivors’ committee reported on June 24, 2026 that the court had approved the sale of 53 acres in Vacaville for about $23.55 million, with net proceeds held for a survivor settlement. No claim count from a court record was found.

Diocese of San Diego

The Roman Catholic Bishop of San Diego filed on June 17, 2024, No. 24-02202, before Judge Christopher B. Latham in the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of California. The bar date for general and survivor claims was February 3, 2025.

No plan has been filed. Objections to claims continued through 2026. On August 27, 2026, Catholic Mutual and Catholic Relief Insurance Company appealed a bankruptcy court order to the district court (S.D. Cal. No. 3:26-cv-04931-JES-BJW). The survivors’ committee filed a renewed motion for relief from the automatic stay on September 4, 2026 (Dkt. 2051), the step that would let some suits go forward outside the bankruptcy. The status hearing was reset to November 6, 2026 at 10:00 a.m. (Dkt. 2007).

The diocese’s release of June 13, 2024, issued four days before it filed, gave Cardinal Robert McElroy’s view that bankruptcy was the “best pathway” to balance compensation for survivors with the Church’s mission. The same release recalls the diocese’s 2007 settlement of $198 million with 144 survivors, a separate matter that is closed. No claim count from a court record after the bar date was found.

Diocese of Santa Rosa

The Roman Catholic Bishop of Santa Rosa was the first of the six to file, on March 13, 2023, No. 23-10113, in the Northern District of California. On May 15, 2026 the case was reassigned from Judge Charles Novack to Judge William J. Lafferty (Dkt. 1994), who also presides over the Oakland case. The bar date for general and survivor claims was October 20, 2023.

The diocese’s status report of August 26, 2026 (Dkt. 2066) says agreements in principle were reached at mediation in May 2026 with the Interstate Insurers, Westport, Lloyd’s/London Market and Zurich, to fund a survivor trust under a future plan. An insurer settlement letter was filed on May 19, 2026 (Dkt. 1996). The diocese says it “has been working on a chapter 11 plan” but has “concerns about possible unsustainable delays.” No plan, settlement amount or court-record claim count was found as of October 5, 2026.

Diocese of Fresno

The Roman Catholic Bishop of Fresno filed on July 1, 2025, No. 25-12231, before Judge René Lastreto II in the Eastern District of California. The bar date for general and survivor claims was February 2, 2026, the most recent of the six.

The court ordered mediation on May 15, 2026 (Dkt. 775) before retired judge Daniel J. Buckley, with sessions on June 30, July 28 and September 1, 2026 (Dkt. 1052). An order of May 31, 2026 (Dkt. 787) extended the diocese’s exclusive period, with a Chapter 11 plan due by October 26, 2026. A status conference is set for November 17, 2026 at 9:30 a.m. (Dkt. 904).

Fresno also faces a pension question. The diocese says it will ask the court to set a bar date for newly scheduled potential claimants tied to pensions (Dkt. 1052), and KVPR reported on September 30, 2026 that 1,792 former employees are listed as potential creditors. As the filing describes it, that deadline is for pension-related claimants; the survivor bar date of February 2, 2026 has passed. No court-record count of abuse claims was found.

Update log

No dated updates are published for this page yet.

Questions we are asked most

Related states and institutions

Our Catholic dioceses page covers clergy abuse litigation nationally, including how a diocesan bankruptcy affects a claim, and the institutions hub groups every institution type this site tracks. The Boy Scouts of America page follows a bankruptcy trust that is already paying claims, and the LA County juvenile facilities page shows what AB 218 produced against a public entity. Dated rulings across all tracked matters are in the case tracker. For support that has nothing to do with litigation, see trauma and healing and reporting abuse.