Laws and Liabilities

In what has proven an eventful week at the diocese, Fr. James DeOreo yesterday brought a new lawsuit for defamation which names Fr. Theodore Dudzinski and the Diocese of Lafayette-in-Indiana as defendants.

This story has been followed closely by our friends at Corpus Christi for Unity and Peace (CUP) since Fr. DeOreo’s suspension from priestly ministry in 2022. CUP will be assembling some further resources, which they’ve kindly agreed to share with us in a day or so.

In the meantime, we’ll attempt to summarize this very complicated situation insofar as we understand it, by breaking it into ten points.

1. Original Allegations: Fr. DeOreo was accused in 2021 of having induced anorexia in a minor Zionsville parishioner, as today’s filing states, “by encouraging him to fast and engage in other spiritual and ascetic practices, eventually causing the Complainer to suffer an eating disorder.”

2. A diocesan investigation was conducted, led by an independent investigator, Kurt Wolf, from January 28, 2021 until February 20, 2021, which found the allegation unsubstantiated, that DeOreo had not in fact caused the eating disorder, and that no abuse had occurred. DeOreo was placed on leave during the investigation and was returned to active ministry upon its satisfactory conclusion.

3. Therapy Sessions: The sequence of events which followed is rather involved. The complaint filed today states that, though the case was closed after the investigation, the diocese funded psychotherapy sessions for the accuser. Fr. Theodore Dudzinski was present at these sessions between February and September of 2021.

Fr. DeOreo alleges that Fr. Dudzinski repeatedly prompted the young person on multiple occasions “that the Diocese would be inclined to either reopen the investigation, or initiate a new investigation if Complainer’s allegations were of a sexual nature,” including the possibility of monetary compensation for the accuser were this to occur, “regardless of the veracity of those allegations.”

DeOreo further alleges that Dudzinski “harbored significant ill will toward DeOreo and believed that an allegation of sexual abuse by Complainer would provide a basis for terminating DeOreo’s employment.”

Various specific incidents of this alleged pattern and the dates on which they are believed to have occurred, are cited in yesterday’s filing, which may be examined here along with statements by Dudzinski that DeOreo argues misrepresented a number of facts to the Complainer. Among these was inducing him to believe falsely that DeOreo was no longer permitted to be in the presence of minors.

4. Second Investigation: Ultimately, following these therapy sessions, allegations of “grooming” were made, though it was made clear by the accuser that no contact of a sexual nature had ever occurred. The accuser retained an attorney to seek monetary compensation from the diocese. A second investigation by Wolf, attorney Barry Loftus, and the diocesan Review Board then took place, which “found no evidence to substantiate the allegations or to support the assertion that the alleged behavior constituted sexual abuse.”

5. Misrepresentations: DeOreo’s suit alleges that Dudzinski led the Complainer and his family falsely to believe, among other things, that DeOreo was forbidden to be anywhere minors were present.

The filing asserts:

“On or about November 9, 2021, and in reliance upon Dudzinski’s representations and impressions that DeOreo had violated a restriction against being in the presence of minors, Complainer sent an email to the Diocese complaining about DeOreo’s presence at a service with children present.”

It goes on to say:

From and after September 28, 2021, without divulging his efforts during August and September to encourage the Complainer to make the new Allegations, Dudzinski operated to hide, obfuscate, or destroy the findings of Review Board and acted to intentionally create the false impression in Diocesan leadership, including Bishop Timothy Doherty, that Complainer’s new allegations were credible, actionable, or otherwise harmful to the Diocese.

On the basis of these, the diocese would issue a decree in November to initiate another inquiry by Wolf and Loftus (though it’s unclear that this was completed) during which time DeOreo would not be permitted to work in youth ministry or with parishioners of St. Alphonsus where the accuser’s family resided.

When DeOreo would later be seen in March with friends at their child’s athletic event, a report would be made to the diocese incorrectly asserting that DeOreo had violated restrictions, and it would be misrepresented to Bishop Doherty that DeOreo was in violation of the November Decree.

6. Suspension: Fr. DeOreo was then suspended from all active priestly ministry by Bishop Doherty in March 2022, was evicted from his lodgings in Carmel and forbidden to live within Howard, Boone, or Hamilton Counties. Doherty corroborates that the suspension occurred because he believed that DeOreo violated the November Decree.

7. Civil Suit: As many are aware, Fr. DeOreo then brought a civil suit for defamation against his accuser, during the course of which his legal team secured from the diocese (not without difficulty, as the diocese initially refused to share these) the documents and information that formed the basis of Fr. DeOreo’s suspension from ministry, including information pertaining to the psychotherapy sessions at which Fr. Dudzinski had been present.

This case was settled, with the terms and amount of damages awarded to Fr. DeOreo remaining confidential. [Edited: an earlier version of this article read “the court found…” rather than “The case was settled.”]

8. No Immanent Return to Ministry: It was hoped by many that upon the successful resolution of this case, that Fr. DeOreo would be permitted to return to active priestly ministry.

This has not occurred. Now this further legal recourse seeks recompense for the irreparable damage to DeOreo’s name, in the sum of ten million dollars. (Yes, you read that correctly.)

9. Yesterday’s lawsuit alleges:

• Firstly: Defamation of Fr. DeOreo by the diocese, which in writing falsely stated the reason of the suspension & falsely intimated abuse, and misused canon law in a way that would imply a full canonical procedure had been conducted and had pointed to guilt when this had not occurred. Details of the case were prematurely shared with media in a fashion that violated canon law, gave rise to further slanders in the media, and no retraction or clarification has been released by the diocese to rectify any of the damage caused.

• Secondly: Fraud on the part of Fr. Theodore Dudzinski with respect to making knowingly false and misleading claims that have caused damage; that Dudzinski’s actions constitute fraud pursuant to Indiana’s criminal statute, I.C.§35-43-5-4, and additionally constitute common law fraud.

10. Thoughts: We’ve debated for a few reasons how best to cover this matter, but it has exposed such serious concerns in the functioning of our diocese, regardless of this new action’s outcome, that it seems important to lay this out. There is a sense of spiritual heaviness and tragic failure in the fact that matters have ever reached this stage and have been handled as they have, to the ruin of so many things.

Be fortified by the knowledge that God hears our prayers for our diocese and is our justice and our hope.

And be judicious in your thoughts and comments.

Update from Corpus Christi for Unity & Peace:

CUP has provided a precis of this current and past legal actions pertaining to Fr. DeOreo, and compiled much additional information about this situation from Fr. DeOreo’s attorney. They also have multiple action points, resources, and links for anyone wishing to be involved. I encourage you to view this information here.