Lawsuit Update Center
The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, often called the LDS Church or Mormon Church, continues to face civil lawsuits alleging that church leaders, volunteers, members, and affiliated organizations failed to protect children from sexual abuse.
The central question in many of these cases is not only what the individual abuser did. Plaintiffs also ask what bishops, local leaders, youth-program officials, or central church representatives knew, whether they reported the abuse, and whether internal church systems protected the child or protected the institution.
LDS sexual abuse cases are not consolidated in one national class action or multidistrict litigation. They proceed as individual lawsuits under the law of the state where the abuse, reporting decisions, or institutional conduct occurred. That makes venue, clergy-confidentiality rules, filing deadlines, and the available evidence especially important.
If you were sexually abused in an LDS setting, you may have a civil claim even if the abuse happened years ago or no criminal charges were filed. Call our sexual abuse lawyers at 888-322-3010.
August 2026 LDS Abuse Litigation Status
- Arizona reporting ruling: The Arizona Supreme Court ruled that clergy were not required to report abuse learned through a confidential religious confession under the circumstances presented in the Adams litigation.
- Insurance litigation: A federal appeals court revived the Church’s effort to obtain insurance coverage for some defense and settlement costs arising from child sexual abuse claims.
- No national class action: LDS abuse claims remain individual cases rather than one nationwide class action or MDL.
- Confidential resolutions: Some cases settle privately, making a reliable national average difficult to calculate.
- State law controls: Clergy privilege, mandatory-reporting duties, statutes of limitation, damages, and institutional liability vary substantially by state.
When May the LDS Church Be Liable?
A survivor may have an institutional claim when a bishop, youth leader, volunteer, church employee, or other official knew or should have known that someone posed a danger and failed to take reasonable action.
Potential claims may involve failure to report, negligent hiring or supervision, unsafe youth programs, ignored complaints, discouraging police involvement, misuse of clergy authority, or an internal response that allowed the abuse to continue.
LDS Sexual Abuse Lawsuit News and Updates
Arizona Supreme Court Rules for Church on Clergy Confidentiality
The Arizona Supreme Court ruled that clergy were not legally required to report child abuse disclosed through a confidential religious confession under the circumstances presented in the Adams case.
The litigation arose after a father admitted to an LDS bishop that he was sexually abusing his daughter. Church officials did not report the confession to law enforcement, and the abuse allegedly continued for years. The survivors later sued the Church and two bishops.
The ruling reversed a 2025 appellate decision that would have allowed a jury to examine whether the communications were protected and whether the Church’s religious rules required confidentiality.
This is a significant defense ruling for Arizona failure-to-report claims, but it does not create a national rule. Other states use different clergy-privilege and mandatory-reporting statutes, and claims based on negligence, later disclosures, nonconfidential information, or conduct outside confession may require a different analysis.
Federal Appeals Court Revives LDS Insurance-Coverage Lawsuit
The Tenth Circuit allowed the LDS Church to resume litigation against two insurers over coverage for defense and settlement costs arising from the sexual abuse of several children.
The dispute concerns how insurance-policy provisions define separate negligent acts or occurrences. The appeals court found ambiguity in the relevant policy language and ruled that, at this stage, the provisions should be interpreted in favor of the Church, the policyholder.
The ruling does not determine whether the Church is liable to any survivor. It remains important because insurance coverage can affect the funds available to defend against and resolve institutional abuse claims.
Nevada Court Dismisses Amended Complaint but Allows Limited Amendment
A federal judge in Nevada granted the LDS Church’s motion to dismiss the second amended complaint in Zimmerman v. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.
The plaintiff alleged that the Church negligently failed to protect her from sexual abuse and unlawful transportation by an individual defendant. The court allowed a limited opportunity to file another complaint asserting a properly pleaded negligence-per-se theory.
The decision illustrates a recurring challenge in institutional abuse litigation: severe abuse does not automatically establish liability against the institution. The complaint must connect the Church’s own duty, conduct, and alleged legal violation to the harm.
California Federal Court Enters Judgment for LDS Defendants
A federal court entered judgment dismissing the plaintiff’s claims with prejudice in Risley v. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints after granting summary judgment to the defendants.
The ruling was case-specific and does not resolve other LDS abuse lawsuits. It does show why plaintiffs must develop admissible evidence connecting church conduct to the abuse and must satisfy the substantive law governing the particular claims.
About the LDS Church
The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is a Christian denomination headquartered in Salt Lake City, Utah. The Church has congregations throughout the United States and a significant membership presence in Utah, Arizona, Idaho, Nevada, California, Washington, Oregon, and other western states.
Local congregations are led by bishops and other lay leaders. Children and teenagers may participate in Sunday instruction, youth groups, camps, missionary preparation, scouting activities, interviews, service projects, and other church-sponsored programs.
That structure can create access and trust. A child may view a bishop, youth leader, teacher, scout leader, missionary, or respected church member as a person with religious and community authority.
The Church’s financial resources do not establish liability. They may, however, affect the practical ability to pay a judgment or settlement when a survivor proves institutional responsibility.
What LDS Sexual Abuse Lawsuits Allege
LDS sexual abuse lawsuits may involve abuse by clergy, youth leaders, volunteers, scout leaders, teachers, missionaries, employees, relatives, or other church members.
A survivor’s direct claim against the perpetrator is separate from an institutional claim against the Church. Institutional liability usually requires evidence that the Church or its representatives committed their own wrongful acts or omissions.
Common allegations include:
- Failing to investigate earlier complaints or warning signs.
- Failing to report suspected child abuse to police or child-protection authorities.
- Discouraging a survivor or family from contacting law enforcement.
- Allowing an accused person to continue working with or having access to children.
- Negligently selecting, training, supervising, or retaining a leader or volunteer.
- Using internal church discipline instead of measures reasonably calculated to protect children.
- Misrepresenting the safety of a church program or leader.
- Concealing prior reports or transferring responsibility without warning another congregation or family.
The Church denies wrongdoing in many cases and may argue that it lacked prior notice, that the perpetrator acted outside any church role, that clergy privilege prevented disclosure, or that the claim was filed after the applicable deadline.
The LDS Abuse Help Line
One of the most contested issues in LDS abuse litigation is the Church’s help line for local leaders who receive reports or disclosures of abuse.
Plaintiffs and critics allege that the help line sometimes operated more as a legal-risk system than as an independent child-protection service. They argue that reports could be routed through attorneys and internal church channels rather than being reported to police or child-protection authorities immediately.
The Church disputes that characterization and says its policies are intended to comply with the law, assist victims, and protect children.
The help line became a central issue in the Arizona Adams litigation. The father disclosed abuse to an LDS bishop, but church officials did not report the disclosure. Litigation then focused on Arizona’s clergy-confidentiality exception and whether the relevant communications were protected.
The August 2026 Arizona ruling strengthens the Church’s confidentiality defense in that state. It does not answer whether a church can be liable when officials receive information outside confession, learn of continuing danger through another source, negligently supervise an abuser, or operate in a state with different reporting laws.
Holding the LDS Church Liable for Sexual Abuse
A church is not automatically liable whenever one of its members commits abuse. The survivor generally must prove a legal basis for holding the institution responsible.
Potential legal theories include:
- Negligent hiring or selection: The Church allegedly placed a person in a position of trust without reasonable screening.
- Negligent supervision: Leaders allegedly failed to monitor an adult who had access to children or ignored unsafe one-on-one contact.
- Negligent retention: The institution allegedly allowed a leader or volunteer to remain after receiving warning signs or complaints.
- Failure to warn or protect: Church officials allegedly knew of a danger but failed to warn families or restrict access to children.
- Failure to report: A mandatory reporter allegedly failed to notify the proper authorities when state law required a report.
- Misrepresentation or concealment: The Church allegedly concealed known risks or represented that a person or program was safe.
- Vicarious liability: In some cases, plaintiffs argue that church entities are responsible because the perpetrator used assigned duties, church authority, or an institutional position to commit the abuse.
Vicarious-liability claims can be difficult because sexual abuse is ordinarily outside the legitimate scope of a person’s duties. Negligence claims may be stronger when there is evidence of prior notice, unsafe access, ignored reports, poor supervision, or an institutional decision that left the child exposed.
Potential Settlement Value of an LDS Abuse Lawsuit
There is no reliable national average settlement for LDS Church sexual abuse lawsuits. Many resolutions are confidential, and the publicly reported outcomes involve very different allegations, injuries, states, defendants, and legal defenses.
The strongest cases can have substantial value when they involve severe or repeated abuse, a young or especially vulnerable survivor, lasting psychological injury, and persuasive proof that church officials had notice or failed to respond reasonably.
Claims become more difficult when the only connection to the Church is the perpetrator’s membership, the institution had no prior reason to anticipate the abuse, the critical conduct occurred outside any church activity, or the claim faces a strong limitations or clergy-privilege defense.
The factors most likely to drive value include:
| Valuation Factor | Facts That May Increase Value | Common Defense Issues |
|---|---|---|
| Nature of the abuse | Rape, penetration, violence, repeated contact, coercion, exploitation, or abuse over an extended period. | Disputes over proof, identity, timing, memory, or whether particular conduct occurred. |
| Institutional notice | Earlier complaints, admissions, help-line calls, disciplinary records, transfers, or warnings about the same person. | Clergy privilege, lack of admissible notice, confidentiality, or an argument that the information was too vague. |
| Psychological harm | PTSD, depression, substance use, self-harm, hospitalization, relationship problems, employment loss, or long-term treatment. | Alternative causes, prior trauma, treatment gaps, or disputes over prognosis. |
| Church connection | The abuser used a church position, building, program, assignment, interview, or religious authority to obtain access and trust. | The Church may argue that the abuse was private conduct unrelated to any institutional duty. |
| Filing law and venue | A timely claim in a state with survivor-protective filing rules, strong discovery rights, and meaningful institutional remedies. | Statute-of-limitations, revival-window, damages-cap, immunity, jurisdiction, or choice-of-law defenses. |
Damages Available in LDS Sexual Abuse Cases
A survivor who proves a civil claim may seek compensation for the full harm caused by the abuse and the institution’s conduct. Available damages depend on state law.
- Medical and counseling expenses: Past and future therapy, psychiatric care, medication, hospitalization, and related treatment.
- Pain and suffering: Emotional trauma, shame, fear, loss of trust, sleep problems, depression, anxiety, and PTSD.
- Lost income and earning capacity: Employment disruption, disability, reduced productivity, and diminished lifetime earnings.
- Loss of enjoyment of life: Harm to education, family relationships, religious identity, friendships, intimacy, and daily functioning.
- Punitive damages: Additional damages may be available in some states when the plaintiff proves especially reckless, malicious, fraudulent, or oppressive conduct.
Reported LDS Sexual Abuse Settlements and Verdicts
Publicly reported outcomes should be read cautiously. A news report may not disclose every defendant, allocation, insurance contribution, confidentiality term, appellate development, or factual distinction.
The results below are examples rather than an average or promise of what another case will recover.
| Reported Result | Allegations and Case Notes |
|---|---|
| Washington – Reported $1.1 Million Settlement | A boy was reportedly abused in an LDS-related preschool setting. The lawsuit alleged that church officials were notified but did not respond properly. |
| California – Reported $995,000 Settlement | A girl allegedly disclosed repeated sexual abuse by a Church member. Plaintiffs alleged that reports to church authorities were mishandled. |
| California – $2.28 Billion Verdict Against Individual Abuser | A jury entered a multibillion-dollar verdict involving abuse by a stepfather. Public reports indicated that claims involving the LDS Church had been resolved separately. The full jury award should not be treated as an LDS Church verdict. |
| California – Reported $1 Million Settlement | The plaintiff alleged years of abuse by a stepfather and that complaints were ignored by LDS leaders. |
| West Virginia – Reported $32 Million Resolution | Reports described claims that the Church knew of a danger and failed to act. The precise allocation and underlying settlement documents should be reviewed before using this result as a valuation comparison. |
| Oregon – Reported $800,000 and $75,000 Settlements | Two survivors alleged abuse involving a Church-affiliated scout leader and failures of supervision or reporting. |
| California – Reported $100,000 Settlement | A Church member was accused of abusing a child at a chapel and other Church-related locations. The matter reportedly resolved without an admission of liability. |
| Washington – Reported $1.2 Million Verdict | A jury reportedly found institutional liability after two girls were abused by their stepfather and abuse reports were allegedly mishandled. |
Your Rights Depend on the State
The filing deadline and available claims depend heavily on where the abuse happened, where the responsible institution operated, when the survivor discovered the connection between the abuse and later injuries, and whether a state enacted a revival window.
- Utah: Utah is important because the Church is headquartered there, but the law can present significant deadline and liability issues. A Utah connection does not automatically mean Utah law controls every claim.
- California: California has enacted major childhood-sexual-assault filing reforms. The applicable rule depends on the date of the abuse, the plaintiff’s age, delayed discovery, and whether an earlier revival period applies.
- Arizona: Arizona remains central because of litigation involving clergy privilege, mandatory reporting, and the LDS help line. The August 2026 Arizona Supreme Court decision strengthens confidentiality protections for certain confessional communications.
- New York and New Jersey: Both states have enacted significant reforms affecting older childhood sexual abuse claims, but prior revival windows and current deadlines must be evaluated carefully.
- Oregon and Washington: Both states have seen LDS-related litigation and reported resolutions. Their filing and institutional-liability rules are not identical.
- Nevada and Colorado: Claims require a state-specific review of filing deadlines, negligence duties, clergy privilege, available defendants, and the connection between the abuse and the Church.
Do Not Assume an Older Claim Is Automatically Barred
Some states extend childhood sexual abuse deadlines, use delayed-discovery rules, or have enacted temporary revival windows. Other states remain restrictive. The exact dates and defendants should be reviewed before concluding that a claim is too old.
Evidence to Preserve in an LDS Abuse Case
You do not need every record before contacting a lawyer. Preserve what you already have, including:
- The congregation, ward, stake, temple, school, camp, scout troop, or youth program involved.
- The abuser’s name, nickname, church calling, volunteer role, or physical description.
- Approximate dates, the survivor’s age, and where the abuse occurred.
- Names of bishops, counselors, youth leaders, teachers, relatives, or others who received a report.
- Emails, letters, journals, text messages, photographs, church directories, and disciplinary communications.
- Police, child-protection, medical, counseling, school, employment, and therapy records.
- A written timeline of the abuse, disclosures, church response, retaliation, and long-term effects.
Do not contact the accused person or attempt to obtain confidential church records on your own. A lawyer can send preservation notices and use formal discovery procedures when a lawsuit is filed.
LDS Sexual Abuse Lawsuit FAQ
Contact Our LDS Sexual Abuse Lawyers
If you were sexually abused by an LDS leader, volunteer, member, employee, relative, or another person who used a Church position or program to obtain access to you, call us at 888-322-3010.
We will review the state, dates, Church connection, prior reports, filing deadline, and evidence that may support an institutional claim. You do not need every Church record or the complete legal name of every person involved before contacting us.
