Legal Wins of Early 2026

[Pyreaux]

Much of the dominating press surrounding the Church often focuses on new filings and settlements, but there have been several "wins" for the Church in the last few months.

Insurance Coverage

One of the most significant recent financial wins occurred on May 13, 2026, at the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals. The Church had previously lost a lower-court ruling where a judge sided with the insurance companies, ACE Property & Casualty, refusing to cover a $32 million settlement involving Michael Jensen. The lower court had ruled the Church’s failure to prevent abuse constituted "multiple occurrences," exhausting coverage limits.

In the recent appellate hearing, judges signaled they were likely to reverse that decision. The 10th Circuit panel suggested that the failure of church officials to stop the abuse should be treated as a single occurrence, which would force insurers to pay out millions that the Church otherwise would have had to cover out of pocket. While a final written opinion typically takes several weeks or months to be released.

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints v. ACE Property & Casualty Company et al. (10th Cir. Case No. 25-4122).

Courthouse News - Mormon church battles insurers over sex abuse settlement coverage

First Amendment and Church Autonomy Defense

The Church often joins amicus briefs or uses similar legal strategies to other religious groups to secure broad protections for religious institutions. In cases like Union Gospel Mission v. Brown, the 9th Circuit reinforced the "church autonomy doctrine." While not the defendant, the LDS Church has heavily lobbied for this standard, which recently upheld the right of religious organizations to hire only those who share their "mission" and "values" for non-ministerial roles, like IT or operations. If I recall, there was some uproar about BYU employees.

ADF Media - 9th Circuit affirms religious ministries can hire like-minded individuals

Donor Privacy

April 29, 2026, The Supreme Court ruled in First Choice v. Davenport that religious-affiliated nonprofits cannot be forced to hand over donor lists to state governments. This was a major strategic win for the Church's legal arm, which prioritizes the privacy of its financial supporters and tithe-payers.

JD Supra - Unanimous SCOTUS Expands Ability to Challenge Subpoenas

Dismissals

Statute of Limitations Successes

In several states without "look-back" windows, the Church has successfully had older abuse claims dismissed. While California and Oregon are currently seeing a flood of cases due to new laws, the Church has successfully defended against similar suits in states where the statute of limitations has not been reopened, arguing that the claims are "time-barred."

Lawsuit Information Center - May 2026 Update

Privilege Protections

Despite challenges in Arizona and Washington, the Church has successfully maintained its clergy-penitent privilege in several lower-court motions in 2026. This allows bishops to avoid testifying about confessions made during private interviews, a core legal shield for the Church.

Arizona Supreme Court - Amicus Filing on Clergy-Penitent Privilege

Procedural & Settlement Victories

The "Stay" Strategy

In several pending 2026 cases, the Church’s legal team has successfully filed for stays, temporary pauses. This is considered a strategic win because it prevents the discovery process, where internal Church documents and disciplinary files would be turned over to plaintiffs, while they negotiate for smaller and confidential settlements.

Motley Rice - LDS Sexual Abuse Lawsuit & Helpline Claims

Negotiated Reductions

In March 2026, the Church successfully negotiated a series of smaller, private settlements in the Midwest that were significantly lower than the record-breaking $2.28 billion verdict from 2023, effectively capping their financial exposure in those regions.

Sokolove Law - $2.28 Billion Verdict vs. $1 Million Settlement

Some Commentary

From an LDS defensive perspective, the surge in lawsuits can be viewed as not just as a search for justice, but as a coordinated attempt to use "lawfare" to harm the Church. There are many ex-LDS activists and specific law firms being motivated by financial gain or ideological hostility rather than specific legal merits.

How do I know this? The mass-tort machine is something you can see in real-time through the public marketing and internal strategies of major law firms. These cases are part of what they call "inventories" rather than organic filings. The cases are being filed decades after the fact in states where the law does not even allow it, forcing the Church to spend millions on defense against "time-barred" claims. Some are tragic and legitimate, but many others appear to be part of case inventories gathered by mass-tort firms via aggressive social media advertising. The record-breaking $2.28 billion verdict in 2023 is often cited as an example of jury passion rather than objective law.

The Church’s success in reducing these amounts through appeals and mediation is a necessary correction to keep the legal system fair and grounded in evidence rather than emotion. After 30+ years, witnesses are dead, and memories are unreliable. It is morally wrong to force an institution to defend itself against decades-old allegations where "due process" is impossible because the evidence no longer exists.

Law firms and "lead generators" use highly sophisticated social media algorithms to find potential claimants. Agencies like the Mass Tort Ad Agency specifically market "LDS MTC Abuse Lawsuit" packages to law firms. In May 2026, data showed these agencies were achieving Cost-Per-Leads (CPL) as low as $18–$35.  

The term "inventory" is how these firms actually describe their clients in legal filings. These firms don't just blast ads; they use "LDS affinity data" to target people who have "liked" certain Church-related pages, graduated from BYU, or live in high-LDS density areas. At $20 a lead, a firm can spend $20,000 to get 1,000 "leads," then filter those down into a "case inventory" of 100 clients. If they settle those 100 cases for just $50,000 each, the firm takes a 40% cut, turning a $20,000 ad spend into a $2 million profit.

Ex-LDS influencers often share "call to action" posts from law firms like Dolman Law Group or Sokolove Law. By sharing their personal "trauma stories," they prime their audience to see themselves as victims in a potential lawsuit. 

The states that recently opened look-back windows allowing people to sue for abuse that happened decades ago saw an immediate, unnatural spike in filings that coincided perfectly with the social media ad campaigns. In early 2025, over 100 lawsuits were filed in California alone in a single month. It is statistically impossible for 100 unrelated individuals to suddenly decide to sue in the same 30-day window without the coordination of mass-tort advertising.

To the Church in many of the cases, a $50,000 settlement is often considered a "nuisance settlement", paid simply to make a case go away because defending it in court would cost more, even if the case is likely fraudulent or lacks evidence.

In 2026 began Litigation Funding. Wall Street hedge funds actually invest in these law firms to pay for the social media ads. These investors don't care about the victims, they care about the Return on Investment. This creates a massive incentive for firms to sign up as many people as possible, regardless of the strength of their case, to ensure they can pay back their investors with a bulk settlement.

Everyone can know this is happening because you can see the ads, you can read the agencies' own case-acquisition strategies online, and you can track the bulk filing patterns that only occur when a law firm has spent months harvesting leads through social media.

Listen to all victims. Believing someone’s pain and validating their experience is a moral act, but a courtroom is a place of evidence. A presumption of guilt against the church, simply because it's wealthy or because it's the Latter-day Saints, is a violation of due process. If we skip the evidence because of an anti-LDS sentiment, we destroy the legal system for everyone.

Edited May 15 by Pyreaux

[Calm]

57 minutes ago, Pyreaux said:

Listen to all victims. Believing someone’s pain and validating their experience is a moral act, but a courtroom is a place of evidence. A presumption of guilt against the church, simply because it's wealthy or because it's the Latter-day Saints, is a violation of due process. If we skip the evidence because of an anti-LDS sentiment, we destroy the legal system for everyone.

I agree with the need for the legal system to be used for punishment, paying damages, etc.

But due to things like technicalities, poor representation, statute of limitations (which are necessary imo due to issues with evidence), etc., justice is not always found in the courtroom.  Often isn’t found in for most sexual assault and abuse cases if the usual stats are accurate (not reported out of fear and shame because of our culture as well as personal threats, reported but not charged, arrested but not prosecuted, etc).  Due process shouldn’t be expected or required in any other venue besides the legal one, due process is required of the government and those who are its agents, included judges and juries.  Everyone else in the community…there are, imo, more effective and important standards to judge by.

As far as the mass tort firms…I would love to see a study on the percentage of actual, viable, non nuisance cases that are present in these inventories.  I assume those types of cases get greater attention since more money is likely or does it matter to these firms?

Seems like an upgraded (or down depending on how one views these) version of ambulance chasing.  This should not be surprising to anyone.

Edited May 15 by Calm

[webbles]

3 hours ago, Pyreaux said:

In March 2026, the Church successfully negotiated a series of smaller, private settlements in the Midwest that were significantly lower than the record-breaking $2.28 billion verdict from 2023, effectively capping their financial exposure in those regions.

The $2.28 billion verdict wasn't against the church.  They had already settled.  The $2.28 billion was only against the father and he didn't even show up to argue the case so it was a default jury verdict.  I doubt the same $2.28 billion would have happened if the church was still involved in the case.

[Calm]

8 minutes ago, webbles said:

The $2.28 billion verdict wasn't against the church.  They had already settled.  The $2.28 billion was only against the father and he didn't even show up to argue the case so it was a default jury verdict.  I doubt the same $2.28 billion would have happened if the church was still involved in the case.

Seems like the law company somewhat misrepresented the case on their website or perhaps I just am not that familiar with legal writing (it does say “portion of the case”, but doesn’t it imply as written that is a portion of the 2.38 billion meaning it was more than the father involved, it was also the Church?

[webbles]

32 minutes ago, Calm said:

Seems like the law company somewhat misrepresented the case on their website or perhaps I just am not that familiar with legal writing (it does say “portion of the case”, but doesn’t it imply as written that is a portion of the 2.38 billion meaning it was more than the father involved, it was also the Church?

The "portion of the case" is the part of the case where the church was a defendant.  The original lawsuit had the church, the father, and the mother as defendants.  The church settled for $1 million, then the mother for $200,000.  After that, it finally went to a jury trial and the father didn't even show up.  So the verdict from the jury was technically only against the father.  Only the father has to pay that large amount.  https://apnews.com/article/california-child-sexual-assault-lawsuit-settlement-b0b80f5f6cd3fdb3882f8ba4ed78bc29

[Calm]

2 hours ago, webbles said:

So the verdict from the jury was technically only against the father.  Only the father has to pay that large amount. 

Did they get anything from him?

[webbles]

5 hours ago, Calm said:

Did they get anything from him?

Doubtful.  There was a news article I came across where the victim didn't expect any since her father is over 70 and he isn't that wealthy.  Might have gotten hundreds of thousands but definitely not the full amount.

[The Nehor]

On 5/14/2026 at 7:43 PM, Pyreaux said:

The states that recently opened look-back windows allowing people to sue for abuse that happened decades ago saw an immediate, unnatural spike in filings that coincided perfectly with the social media ad campaigns. In early 2025, over 100 lawsuits were filed in California alone in a single month. It is statistically impossible for 100 unrelated individuals to suddenly decide to sue in the same 30-day window without the coordination of mass-tort advertising.

I mean, yeah, but that is how mass torts work. It is very expensive and risky to seek a case on your own so when you find out others are doing it and the costs are lower people tend to jump on board. That is the purpose of mass tort and class action lawsuits. It lets people get their case heard even if individually it would be too expensive or (in other cases) be too trivial to pursue on its own but collectively worth pursuing. I don’t see this advertising as leading to a lot of ‘fake’ cases. Could there be some? Sure.

Also saying that the hedge fund investors aren’t interested in helping the victims is usually true but this kind of warped venture capitalism is part of the rot of our society that we choose to ignore. That opportunists are profiting off of victims is just a feature of the economic order we choose to live in and says nothing about the victims.

[Pyreaux]

On 5/17/2026 at 11:10 AM, The Nehor said:

I mean, yeah, but that is how mass torts work. It is very expensive and risky to seek a case on your own so when you find out others are doing it and the costs are lower people tend to jump on board. That is the purpose of mass tort and class action lawsuits. It lets people get their case heard even if individually it would be too expensive or (in other cases) be too trivial to pursue on its own but collectively worth pursuing. I don’t see this advertising as leading to a lot of ‘fake’ cases. Could there be some? Sure.

Also saying that the hedge fund investors aren’t interested in helping the victims is usually true but this kind of warped venture capitalism is part of the rot of our society that we choose to ignore. That opportunists are profiting off of victims is just a feature of the economic order we choose to live in and says nothing about the victims.

I did agree somewhat at first but reading it again, I'm not sure how to hold to saying the system is run on warped venture capitalism and simultaneously not suspect the output of that system is going to be corrupt. I think 50% or even higher could be fraudulent, depending entirely on how you define a "fake" case within the pool of legally meritless and unverified claims, or some explicitly fraudulent claims which regularly reaches staggering majorities. They have built a machine that practically invites a portion of them to get paid.

Algorithms map the emotions, specifically, anger and resentment. They see an Ex-LDS subredditer vent over trauma reframed as "abuse". That's about when an algorithm drops a highly targeted, "Have you been harmed by an LDS leader?" When offered money, they think "Well, the leader was a terrible person who ruined my teenage years, so yes, it was abuse, and yes, the Church should pay me for it." An intake form coaches them on how to turn that grudge into a payday.

They click the ad, they are funneled through check-boxes. Was the perpetrator a leader? Did it happen on Church property? Did you report it to a leader? If they answer one incorrectly, the automated system rejects them. If they answer with the right combination of words, they put a financial value on the case. It is designed to shape, flatten, and sometimes manufacture a complex personal history into a pre-packaged legal product that fits a lucrative settlement window. Their stories are pre-built.

Any liar is absolutely getting paid. The entire mass-tort and private mediation infrastructure is practically built to tolerate a percentage of unverified or embellished claims as a cost of doing business.

If a liar has a story that merely hits the exact right legal checkboxes and matches the expected profile of a case, they can easily slide in under the radar. When settlements are finalized, the money is managed by a third-party claims administrator who scores the cases. Say, Tier 1 gets $50k, Tier 2 gets $150k. Often, all that is required to qualify for a lower-tier settlement is a signed affidavit, a verified identity, and a plausible narrative that names a specific church unit or a known leader from that era. With no evidence, because these lower amounts are considered nuisance values, the Church just pays the $40,000 to make it go away. Thus, fraudulent claims are routinely paid out to keep the settlements moving.

To say this whole system "says nothing about the victims." That is wishful thinking. In mass torts, a law firm is highly incentivized to keep liars in the pool. The larger the inventory, the more financial leverage the firm has to force the Church into a massive settlement.

Mostly my point is to respond to the highly theatrical narrative pushed by ex-LDS activists and media headlines. If this were truly just how all mass torts work, Ex-LDS activists and news outlets certainly do not pitch these events as a normal or routine. Instead, they paint a dark portrait of an explicitly evil church full of degenerate leaders and miserly money counters. These same Ex-LDS platforms function as a marketing arm for the mass-tort firms. Outlets like the Open Stories Foundation do all the pre-discovery heavy lifting and generate social media outrage. When the Church steps in to protect its tithing funds or its right to due process through standard legal maneuvers, they crybully.

Edited May 18 by Pyreaux