LDS Church Abuse Lawsuit in Maryland

The help line is a phone number that LDS bishops and other leaders are instructed to call when they learn of abuse. While publicly described as a resource for protecting children, lawsuits and investigative reporting reveal it is staffed by attorneys at Kirton McConkie (the Church's law firm) whose primary concern is the Church's legal exposure. In multiple documented cases, leaders were advised not to report abuse to police.

A statute of limitations is a defense against lawsuits — it does not prevent an institution from resolving a claim brought to it directly. LDS claims have been resolved confidentially even where suit would have been time-barred (the $32 million West Virginia settlement stayed sealed from 2018 until Floodlit revealed it from court records in 2025), particularly where the survivor clearly identifies the person responsible. A confidential review settles the deadline question for your specific facts; no outcome is ever guaranteed.

In many states, yes. Multiple states have passed laws eliminating or extending statutes of limitations for childhood sexual abuse, including "lookback window" provisions that allow previously time-barred claims. States including California, New York, New Jersey, Utah (limited), and others have enacted such legislation. An attorney can advise you on your state's current law.

Often, yes. The church keeps centralized, longitudinal records — callings, ward assignments, moves — and leaders were documented, known figures. A specific ward or stake, an approximate time period, the person’s role, and a detailed description are frequently enough to definitively identify someone decades later. Photographs, yearbooks, and ward directories help.

The clergy-penitent privilege varies by state. Some states exempt clergy from mandatory reporting requirements when they learn of abuse through religious confession. However, many lawsuits argue that the privilege does not apply when: (1) the information came outside of formal confession, (2) the leader had independent knowledge of abuse, or (3) the privilege was used as a shield to conceal ongoing harm to children.

They are separate paths. The BSA bankruptcy trust compensates Scouting abuse claims, but the bankruptcy judge rejected the church’s attempt to buy a release of non-Scouting claims (August 1, 2022), so a direct claim against the church may remain available. Which path — or both — fits your situation depends on timing and facts; a review can map it.

Lawsuits cover sexual abuse by bishops, branch presidents, youth leaders (Young Men/Young Women leaders, Scoutmasters), seminary and institute teachers, mission presidents, and other Church members in positions of trust. Cases also address the Church's failure to conduct background checks, its policy of one-on-one interviews with minors behind closed doors, and its suppression of abuse reports.

A case review is confidential, and courts generally allow survivors to file as Jane or John Doe so your name stays out of the public record. Whether to ever tell anyone in your life remains your choice; nothing about a review requires it.

The LDS Church is estimated to have over $100 billion in assets, primarily through its investment arm, Ensign Peak Advisors. This substantial wealth means the Church has the financial capacity to provide meaningful compensation to abuse survivors. The Church has historically settled cases confidentially with non-disclosure agreements.

The overwhelming majority of these claims resolve without trial — confidential resolution is how the record shows they typically end. Civil claims are also separate from criminal cases: you do not need a police report, and you control whether one is ever made.

Reviews are free and carry no obligation. If a claim proceeds, attorneys in this area typically work on a contingency-fee basis; fee arrangements vary by attorney and are explained before you agree to anything.

When bishops report abuse to the church’s helpline, legally risky cases are referred to the church’s law firm, Kirton McConkie, and the church asserts privilege over those records. If you or a parent told a bishop and nothing happened, that disclosure is evidence — what the church knew and when is exactly what current cover-up litigation tests.

It means connecting a person to the abuse with enough certainty to act: a name, or a combination of photographs, records, and a detailed description tied to a specific ward, stake, or mission and time period. You do not need to describe the abuse itself to begin — identification and timeframe are where every evaluation starts.

The LDS Church help line is a toll-free number that bishops and other Church leaders are instructed to call when they learn of abuse allegations. The help line is staffed by attorneys at Kirton McConkie, the Church's primary outside law firm. Publicly, the Church describes the help line as a resource for protecting children. However, the Associated Press's 2022 investigation and multiple lawsuits have documented cases where the help line advised bishops not to report abuse to police, even when state mandatory reporting laws required it. The help line's legal significance is enormous: it demonstrates that the Church had knowledge of specific abuse allegations, that it chose to filter those allegations through its legal department rather than law enforcement, and that the advice given prioritized the Church's legal exposure over children's safety. In litigation, help line call records (obtained through discovery) are among the most powerful evidence of institutional knowledge and concealment.

You can sue the Church institution directly. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints operates through legal entities including the Corporation of the President of the Church and the Corporation of the Presiding Bishopric, both incorporated in Utah. These entities can be named as defendants in civil lawsuits. The institutional claims against the Church are separate from and in addition to any claims against the individual abuser. Institutional claims include negligent supervision (the Church failed to adequately supervise leaders with access to children), negligent hiring/retention (the Church placed or retained an abuser in a position of trust despite knowledge of prior misconduct), failure to report (the Church failed to report known abuse to law enforcement), breach of fiduciary duty (the Church breached its duty of care to members who trusted it with their children), and fraudulent concealment (the Church actively concealed known abuse from families and law enforcement). The Church has over $100 billion in assets and the financial capacity to pay meaningful compensation.

Yes. The institutional claims against the Church are entirely separate from any claims against the individual abuser. The Church's liability is based on what the institution knew, what it failed to do, and how its policies and practices enabled or concealed the abuse. Even if the individual abuser has died, the Church remains a viable defendant for its own institutional failures — failure to screen leaders, failure to report abuse, failure to remove known abusers from positions of trust, operation of the help line as a concealment mechanism, and lobbying to maintain mandatory reporting exemptions. In fact, many of the strongest LDS abuse cases involve abusers who are deceased but whose pattern of abuse was known to Church leadership for years or decades before the abuser died.

Lookback windows are temporary periods during which state legislatures suspend the statute of limitations for childhood sexual abuse claims, allowing survivors who would otherwise be time-barred to file civil lawsuits regardless of when the abuse occurred. Several states have enacted lookback windows that are particularly significant for LDS abuse survivors: California eliminated the SOL entirely under AB 218. New York's Child Victims Act allows claims until age 55. Texas eliminated the SOL for childhood sexual abuse effective September 2025. Nevada eliminated the SOL in 2021. Multiple other states have extended or eliminated their limitations periods. For LDS abuse survivors, lookback windows are critical because the Church's culture of secrecy and the psychological dynamics of religious abuse often prevent survivors from coming forward for decades. The specific window dates and provisions vary by state, so consulting an attorney who can analyze your claim under your state's current law is essential.

Yes, in virtually all cases. Courts routinely allow survivors of sexual abuse to file lawsuits under pseudonyms — using "Jane Doe" or "John Doe" instead of their real names. This protection is nearly automatic in cases involving childhood sexual abuse. Your identity can remain confidential throughout the litigation, including in all court filings, depositions, and trial proceedings. Many LDS abuse cases settle with confidentiality provisions that further protect the survivor's identity. The only people who will know your identity are your attorney and, during the litigation, the opposing counsel and the court — all of whom are bound by protective orders. Your ward members, family, employer, and community need not know that you have filed a lawsuit. For many LDS abuse survivors, anonymity protection is essential because they fear social consequences within their LDS community or from Church-member family members.