Los Angeles School Sexual Abuse Lawsuits and Settlements

A Los Angeles school sexual abuse case begins with the person who committed the abuse. We quickly jump to the next step of figuring out what the adults in charge knew (or should have known).

Why? To get compensation in a school sex abuse lawsuit, you need to find a defendant who can pay compensation to the victim. The perpetrator, particularly in a school setting, is unlikely to have the assets to fund a settlement or verdict. So we look at the school’s negligence to find compensation.

Most predators in a school setting do much of their legwork in plain sight. A teacher or coach who texts students privately, drives them places that are not home, or has one-on-one meetings behind a closed door. One principal may have known about a boundary violation while the district office held a separate complaint from another campus.

Sometimes this is innocent. Teachers do take a strong interest in their students and can show signs of being a predator when they are not. So what is a school to do? Pay attention. See what is there to be seen and follow up on it. What our lawyers see way too often in these cases is, “That’s Joe, he is just like that,” without any further review and without taking signs of predator behavior to higher authority.

Los Angeles now knows full well the cost of failing to do what you must to protect children. LAUSD and other Los Angeles County school districts have paid hundreds of millions of dollars in sexual abuse settlements and verdicts. We go through the actual numbers and the facts behind them below.

This page explains how these cases work, whether you might be eligible, the settlement amounts victims receive, and gives you food for thought if you are considering seeking compensation for what you went through.

Can You Sue LAUSD or Another Los Angeles School for Sexual Abuse?

A Los Angeles school district or private school may be responsible when failures in hiring, supervision, retention, reporting, investigation, or student safety contributed to sexual abuse. Claims may involve employees, coaches, volunteers, contractors, or other students.

You do not need a criminal conviction to investigate a civil sexual abuse claim against a school. The important question is whether the school or its employees were negligent and whether that negligence contributed to what happened.

For example, a principal may have ignored a prior complaint about a teacher. A coach may have been allowed to spend unsupervised time with students despite repeated warnings. Or a school may have failed to provide supervision that a vulnerable student was supposed to receive.

We see these cases involving LAUSD, other Los Angeles County public school districts, charter schools, private schools, religious schools, and athletic programs. The rules differ depending on the defendant and when the abuse occurred. California also changed important parts of its childhood sexual assault law in September 2026, which we explain below.

If you do not know what school officials knew at the time, that is not a reason to rule out a case. Much of our work is finding out what information was available to the people who should have protected the child.

Los Angeles School Sexual Abuse Settlement Amounts

Some of the largest school sexual abuse settlements and verdicts in California have come from Los Angeles County. These are examples of reported results, not an average settlement amount or a prediction of what a new case will recover.

These numbers have to be read alongside the facts. In the Mountain View case, the jury assigned slightly more than $36 million of the $48 million verdict to the school district, with the remainder attributed to the perpetrator. A jury verdict is also different from a negotiated settlement and does not necessarily represent the amount ultimately collected.

We discuss these cases individually below and provide a full comparison of Los Angeles school sexual abuse settlements and verdicts.

How a Los Angeles School Becomes Legally Responsible

Obviously, the perpetrator is responsible for the crimes committed against children. But there are not many Jeffrey Epsteins out there. So you need a responsible institution to get a meaningful recovery. You only have that if you have a viable negligence claim against the school. Common liability theories include:

• Hiring an employee without a reasonable background or reference investigation. This is probably the least common case we see.
• Failing to supervise classrooms, locker rooms, athletic travel, tutoring, transportation, or after-school activities.
• Retaining or quietly transferring an employee after the school has reason to believe the employee is a sexual predator of children.
• Allowing secret text messages, gifts, private rides, overnight travel arrangements, or off-campus meetings… all classic grooming behaviors.
• Failing to make a report required by the Child Abuse and Neglect Reporting Act.
• Conducting a superficial internal investigation and restoring access to a possible predator to students.
• Failing to respond reasonably to known sexual harassment or abuse by another student.
• Giving a departing employee a clean reference despite a documented safety concern.
• Retaliating against, or simply ignoring, a student, parent, teacher, or coach who reported misconduct.

California reforms enacted in 2025 under Senate Bill 848, which took effect January 1, 2026, required covered schools to adopt professional-boundary policies addressing social media, electronic communications, transportation, and other classic grooming techniques by July 1, 2026. The law also expands training and safety planning duties. This helps lawyers bring these claims because it sets a clearer standard for what schools must do when confronted with these issues.

Different Kinds of Los Angeles School Abuse Claims

These are the main types of school sexual abuse lawsuits:

Abuse by a Teacher or School Employee

The most common claims we see involve teachers. They have the most access and the best opportunity to slow-walk their grooming efforts. These cases often have the clearest institutional trail because the school selected the employee and controlled access to children.

Abuse by a Coach

The second most common claims our lawyers see are against coaches. Sports in LA are a big deal, and the power imbalance between coach and student can be even stronger than that between teacher and student.

Sexual Assault or Harassment by Another Student

The Pasadena Focus Point Academy verdict we talk about below shows the seriousness of a peer abuse claim. You cannot dismiss harassment and hazing as “kids will be kids,” and you certainly have to supervise them.

The school has broad authority during the school day, but liability still depends on evidence. Our lawyers review prior incidents, whether staff were present, the assault’s location, reports from students and parents, disciplinary history, and how quickly and effectively the school responded.

Records That Can Prove a School Abuse Case

Institutions rarely announce what they knew. After a lot of digging, the evidence you find is usually one email, one personnel record, and one forgotten complaint. But when you dig long enough in these cases, you usually find something.

Our lawyers seek a ton of documents: personnel and credentialing files, prior complaints, Title IX records, mandated-reporter communications, school-device data, emails, text messages, team apps, athletic schedules, transportation logs, hotel assignments, classroom access records, security video, board materials, resignation agreements, reference communications, and records sent to the California Commission on Teacher Credentialing.

We talk to former students, parents, teachers, coaches, aides, and administrators who can fill gaps in the timeline (and provide supporting evidence for the claim). This is where the strongest evidence is.

Los Angeles public schools generate records in several places. A principal may keep campus notes while human resources maintains a formal personnel file. The Title IX office has its own database. School police, outside law enforcement, and child-protective services hold separate reports. Finding one clean file that contains the whole story would be unusual to say the least.

We now have a particularly troubling example of this problem from El Monte Union High School District. The California Attorney General’s investigation found that the district used outside investigators to assess its potential civil liability in sexual misconduct cases and then claimed the resulting investigations and evidence were privileged. We talk about that in more detail below. It is hard to think of a better example of how a school can turn the investigation of a child’s complaint into a process focused on protecting the institution.

You do not need the complete record before calling a lawyer.

Yes, preserve messages, photographs, diaries, calendars, yearbooks, team schedules, gifts, cards, and school papers. But if you are considering bringing a claim, the first thing you should do is contact a lawyer as soon as possible.

Los Angeles Courts and Case Procedure

A lawsuit against LAUSD, Pasadena Unified, Mountain View School District, El Monte Union, or another Los Angeles County public school entity will almost always be filed in Los Angeles County Superior Court, which is generally a fair venue for victims of sexual abuse. As you likely know, the Los Angeles court system is massive and spans a wide geographic area.

Public school claims require careful pleading because a district’s liability is statutory. The complaint should identify the negligent acts of administrators and employees rather than relying on the abuser’s employment alone. A private school complaint will include direct corporate negligence, agency, negligent hiring and retention, premises issues, and punitive-damages allegations when supported by the evidence (which is not available in public school cases).

The first thing we do when we are ready to file a lawsuit is to try to get the case settled. Before you file a lawsuit is one of the best times to see whether a settlement is possible. Only when that fails do you file a lawsuit. Most institutional cases begin with written discovery and subpoenas. Plaintiffs then take depositions of principals, supervisors, Title IX personnel, human-resources employees, coaches, and witnesses to earlier complaints.

A district may produce a personnel file that appears thin. That makes depositions and third-party records more important, because consequential conversations may have occurred by telephone, on personal devices, or in meetings that generated no formal report.

Los Angeles County has also entered into enormous settlements involving alleged abuse in juvenile facilities and foster care settings. Those are county cases, generally involving the Department of Probation or child welfare system. They are not a great comparison for school district settlements but they still underscore how sexual abuse of minors by government employees can command large settlements. You can read more about those cases on our Los Angeles juvenile hall sexual abuse lawsuit page.

In fact, we already know this in Los Angeles from all the school sex abuse cases that have already settled.

Another question victims have is whether they can be anonymous when filing a lawsuit. California law protects the survivor’s identity in many court filings through initials or John or Jane Doe. Confidentiality orders can limit public disclosure of medical, therapy, and school records. There is no question that litigation, if your case gets that far, is an invasion of privacy to some extent, but it does not require a survivor to surrender every measure of privacy.

How We Handle California School Sexual Abuse Claims

Miller & Zois works with multiple law firms on these claims. When California counsel is needed, we coordinate with attorneys who can handle the litigation in California courts. We can explain who will be handling your case and the proposed representation arrangement before you decide how to proceed.

Deadline for a Los Angeles School Sexual Abuse Lawsuit

California gives survivors substantial time to bring many childhood sexual-assault claims. Claims involving abuse on or after January 1, 2024 generally have no civil filing deadline. Earlier abuse is governed by different rules, and some institutional claims filed after age 40 require a certificate of merit.

The date of the abuse, the survivor’s age, the defendants, earlier proceedings, and discovery facts can change the analysis. Our California school sexual abuse lawsuit page explains the statewide deadline rules in greater detail. A lawyer should still investigate promptly because school records and electronic communications can disappear while a claim remains legally timely.

Our firm’s intake is narrower than California law. Miller & Zois is currently accepting new school sexual abuse claims only from survivors who are under age 40 when the lawsuit is filed. This is our firm’s decision about the cases we are taking, not a declaration that every older survivor is legally barred from suing.

September 30, 2026: California Enacts SB 577

California enacted a major change to childhood sexual assault litigation when Governor Gavin Newsom signed Senate Bill 577 on September 30, 2026. The new law makes some older claims against public school districts more difficult to prove and changes important filing and damages rules.

Our concern is the impact on people who were abused years ago, particularly survivors who are now over 40 and are considering a lawsuit against LAUSD or another public school district.

For sexual abuse that occurred before January 1, 2024, SB 577 changes the general filing period under Code of Civil Procedure section 340.11. It retains a period extending 22 years after the survivor turns 18 but reduces one alternative discovery period from five years to three years. That discovery period concerns when the survivor discovered, or reasonably should have discovered, that a psychological injury or illness occurring after adulthood was caused by the childhood sexual assault. The later applicable deadline generally controls. Separate rules apply to certain cases involving sexual images of children.

That is an important distinction. Learning years later that the school may have been negligent is not necessarily the same legal event as discovering the connection between childhood sexual assault and a later psychological injury.

Additional Requirements for Some Survivors Age 40 or Older

The new law also imposes a higher proof requirement on certain lawsuits against public entities involving abuse before January 1, 2024. It applies by its terms to claims filed on or after January 1, 2026, by plaintiffs who were 40 or older when they filed.

For those claims, SB 577 requires clear and convincing evidence that the public entity knew of misconduct that resulted in childhood sexual assault and failed to take reasonable protective steps or implement safeguards. The plaintiff must also establish that the public entity negligently discharged a mandatory duty.

This is a substantial hurdle. The older standard in many school negligence claims allowed plaintiffs to prove their case under the ordinary civil burden. Requiring clear and convincing evidence of specific institutional knowledge and a negligent breach of a mandatory duty gives public schools another defense.

The legislation also addresses certificates of merit, prohibits treble damages against public entities under the amended childhood sexual assault statute, and gives courts additional authority concerning the reduction or payment structure of judgments against public entities.

SB 577 was signed in September 2026, with its provisions generally scheduled to take effect January 1, 2027. But the statute expressly reaches certain cases filed on or after January 1, 2026, and the application of its provisions to pending litigation may generate legal challenges and disputes. It should not be treated as a simple January 2027 cutoff.

Does this mean survivors over 40 can no longer sue LAUSD? No. It means the legal investigation has become more complicated for some claims. There may be evidence showing the school knew of misconduct and failed to act. The facts, filing date, defendants, applicable exceptions, and procedural history all matter.

I would be very reluctant to tell anyone they are too late to bring a childhood sexual abuse lawsuit without carefully reviewing their particular situation. These rules have changed repeatedly, and SB 577 adds another layer of complexity.

That said, our firm is not currently taking school sexual abuse cases for survivors who are 40 or older when filing. Survivors in that age group may want to consult another California lawyer about whether their claims remain viable.

These changes also do not mean every claim against a private school is subject to the same additional public-entity requirements. The identity of the defendant matters.

LAUSD Sexual Abuse Lawsuits

Los Angeles Unified is the second-largest public school district in the country. Its size creates layers upon layers that you do not see in a private school. So when our lawyers are investigating a case like this, we know there are multiple layers of information flow.

These next sections are all with an eye toward better understanding settlement values in the context of the facts, so you have a better idea of the range in which these cases settle and what jury verdicts look like. We also give you a look at some of the more recent lawsuits that have been filed.

Miramonte Elementary School and Mark Berndt

The Miramonte Elementary School cases involving former teacher Mark Berndt are the most infamous sexual abuse lawsuits against the LAUSD. Berndt taught at the South Los Angeles campus for, inexplicably, decades. He was arrested in 2012 and later entered no-contest pleas to criminal charges involving numerous students.

LAUSD settled many cases years ago. Then a new wave of students came forward, and in April 2026 the district agreed to pay $30.5 million to 19 additional former students (about $1.6 million per person). All told, the Berndt debacle cost the LAUSD over $200 million.

Telfair Elementary, De La Torre Elementary, and South East High School

Miramonte is the largest LAUSD example, but sadly it is far from the only one. LAUSD settled a lawsuit involving former Telfair Elementary School teacher Paul Chapel and former De La Torre Elementary School teacher Robert Pimentel. Chapel and Pimentel were convicted in separate criminal cases. The settlement was $8.4 million for four former Telfair students and $10 million for five former De La Torre students as part of a larger group of district settlements.

So pretty close to a per person average of $2 million in both cases.

LAUSD also agreed to pay $6.5 million to a South East High School student who alleged that a science teacher sexually abused her. This case was made worse by the fact that she reported what happened, but it was ignored. You know the failure was awful when two administrators were convicted of criminal failure-to-report charges. Both pleaded no contest in 2008 to misdemeanor charges involving their failure to report the student’s disclosure of abuse. So you can see why the victim received so much here. The student did what adults tell children to do.

She reported the abuse to people with authority to do something about it, and they sat on their hands. The Los Angeles Times reported the administrators’ convictions and the allegations that the school district later retained and promoted them.

San Gabriel Valley School Sexual Abuse Cases

Mountain View School District and Miramonte Elementary School

In April 2025, a Los Angeles County jury awarded six former students sexually abused by longtime teacher Joseph Baldenebro at Miramonte Elementary School (confusingly, a different school named Miramonte) in South El Monte $48 million ($8 million per person). The students were tragically young, between 8 and 10 years old when the abuse occurred. Baldenebro was convicted.

The lawyers for the Mountain View School District did not even bother to argue the school was not negligent. They just argued about the extent to which its conduct caused the students’ harm. That is a tough argument to make, and the verdict reflected that.

Pasadena Unified School District and Focus Point Academy

A Los Angeles County jury ordered a $26 million payout to a Pasadena Unified School District student who was sexually assaulted by three classmates at Focus Point Academy. The facts are gruesome. She was 11 years old and enrolled in a special-education program for children with emotional disabilities. The evidence showed that a teacher’s aide assigned to supervise her left her alone with the students who assaulted her.

The defense? Deny everything, including the fact that the assault even occurred. It did not work. The jury awarded $12.5 million for past pain and suffering and $13.5 million for future pain and suffering.

We always say peer-on-peer cases are more difficult to bring against the school than teacher/coach claims. But this case underscores that schools have a duty to protect children from being sexually abused by other students.

El Monte Union High School District

Another significant Los Angeles school case involves El Monte Union High School District. In March 2026, the California Attorney General announced a court-approved settlement requiring extensive reforms after an investigation found systemic failures in the district’s handling of sexual harassment, assault, and abuse complaints.

The state reviewed more than 88,000 documents, 199,000 emails, and 113 complaints, and conducted 26 interviews. The resulting judgment requires changes to complaint tracking, reporting, training, and oversight, with at least four years of monitoring.

What jumps out at me is the recordkeeping. The Attorney General found serious deficiencies in how the district maintained and tracked complaints. That is exactly the kind of problem our lawyers encounter. When school officials do not connect the information they have, a pattern of abuse can go undetected or unaddressed for years.

But there is something even more troubling in the Attorney General’s complaint. The state says the district had an unwritten practice of hiring outside investigators to examine allegations of employee sexual misconduct for the purpose of assessing the district’s potential civil liability. The district then claimed those investigations, and the evidence gathered during them, were protected by attorney-client privilege and refused to disclose the material to the parties.

Think about that for a minute. A child reports sexual misconduct by a teacher. The school is supposed to investigate, protect the child, and follow the procedures the law requires. Instead, according to the Attorney General, the district turned to an investigation aimed at determining its own legal exposure, then kept the results from the people who made the complaints.

The complaint describes a particularly disturbing example. In October 2022, a teacher and coach resigned after allegations of inappropriate conduct and grooming spanning more than a decade. The district’s outside investigation reportedly substantiated many of the complaints. Some findings even appeared in draft termination documents. Yet the district failed to give complainants the findings or the written determinations required by its own policies and applicable law.

The Attorney General’s findings are important in their own right. They also provide a useful starting point for civil cases. Former students have filed separate lawsuits against El Monte Union involving allegations of abuse dating back to the 1990s. The regulatory settlement does not decide those individual claims or establish what each survivor should recover, but the district’s history of complaints and investigations may become important evidence.

This is the sort of thing that should infuriate parents. The school had procedures. It had people designated to receive complaints. It had access to investigators. But according to the state, the system was too often operating to evaluate the institution’s legal problems while students were left without the protections and information they were supposed to receive.

And that circles back to what we said at the beginning. These cases frequently turn on what the adults knew and what they did with that knowledge.

Other Los Angeles County Schools and Programs

Torrance Unified School District and Torrance High School

Torrance Unified paid 25 current and former students who were abused by wrestling coach Thomas Snider $31 million to settle their claims. A criminal conviction really helps these cases, and Snider was convicted and received a sentence of 69 years to life in prison. Most of the plaintiffs were at Torrance High School, but one claim went back to when this predator was at Madrona Middle School.

The abuse was carried out under the guise of checking wrestlers for ringworm and other skin conditions. This case had good notice, too. The district had received an abuse report years earlier and still allowed Snider secluded access to students. The settlement included a reported $27 million insurance contribution and $4 million from the district.

The average settlement in these cases was a little over a million. We keep pointing out the averages not to tell you the settlement value of your claim but just give you more context about how these cases are valued.

Long Beach Unified School District and Cabrillo High School

In July 2025, Los Angeles County prosecutors charged former Cabrillo High School baseball coach Gabriel Vigil with multiple sex offenses involving a student. The alleged conduct occurred while he worked as a coach and at other locations.

The charges are allegations and do not establish that the school district was negligent. Any civil claim against the district would require an investigation of what school employees knew, what was reported, and how the district responded.

Viewpoint School in Calabasas

Los Angeles County prosecutors charged former Viewpoint School teacher Travis Takeshi Shojinaga in February 2026 with possession of child sexual abuse material and misdemeanor child-molestation counts. Prosecutors allege that he secretly took intimate photographs of at least four female students. He pleaded not guilty, and every charge remains an allegation unless proved.

The District Attorney’s charging announcement identifies case number 26VWCF00455 and says that Shojinaga taught at Viewpoint for ten years. Any civil claim would require a separate investigation of the school’s conduct, including whether administrators had earlier notice and how they responded once a student reported the alleged photography.

Are these cases valued the same as a serious sexual assault claim if there was no touching involved? Generally no. But you see good settlements in some non-contact cases.

Harvard-Westlake School

A 2026 lawsuit filed against Harvard-Westlake School alleges that a student was sexually abused and harassed by teammates in the school’s water polo program and that school officials failed to respond adequately to reports of misconduct.

The complaint also alleges that the school failed to protect the student after the reports and that he experienced retaliation. These allegations have not been established by a civil verdict. But the case raises the same questions we see in peer sexual abuse litigation: what did coaches and administrators know, what was happening in the athletic program, and what did the school do once concerns were reported?

William S. Hart Union High School District

One of the most important California school liability decisions came from a Los Angeles County school district. In C.A. v. William S. Hart Union High School District, the California Supreme Court recognized that a school district may be liable for negligence by administrators and supervisors in hiring, supervising, or retaining an employee who sexually abused a student.

That decision does not make the school automatically liable whenever an employee commits abuse. The plaintiff still needs evidence of negligent conduct by school personnel that contributed to the injury. But it is an important legal foundation for these cases.

Suffice to say, there have been a lot of problems in Los Angeles public and private schools. Are things getting better? They are. But no matter how many new systems get added to spot grooming and sexual abuse, the systems do not help if no one is following them.

Catholic and Religious School Sexual Abuse Lawsuits in Los Angeles

Religious schools present many of the same liability questions as public schools. Was there a complaint about a teacher, coach, priest, or other adult who had access to students? Did the school investigate it? Did church or school administrators know about earlier misconduct? Was the person moved to another school or ministry instead of being removed from contact with children?

There is also a different financial and legal structure to investigate. Some religious schools are operated by a diocese or archdiocese. Others have their own governing boards, religious orders, or affiliated entities. We have to identify who employed or supervised the perpetrator, who controlled the school, and what insurance or assets may be available to compensate the survivor.

Archdiocese of Los Angeles: $880 Million Sexual Abuse Settlement

In October 2024, the Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Los Angeles agreed to an $880 million global settlement to resolve approximately 1,353 childhood sexual abuse claims filed under California’s Assembly Bill 218. The settlement was one of the largest institutional sexual abuse resolutions in the country.

One important distinction: this was not exclusively a school sexual abuse settlement. The claims involved alleged abuse by clergy and others associated with the Archdiocese, across parishes, schools, and other religious settings. It would be misleading to treat the $880 million as an average or comparable result for a single Catholic school abuse case.

But the settlement is still important. It shows the financial exposure institutions can face when years of allegations and institutional conduct are examined together. The Archdiocese had already paid hundreds of millions of dollars in earlier abuse settlements.

Our lawyers look closely at the actual school and church relationships in these cases. We want to know who supervised the perpetrator, where prior complaints went, and whether the information made it beyond the individual campus. A priest, a coach, and a lay teacher may all have different reporting relationships. That can matter enormously when trying to establish institutional negligence.

Private and religious schools may also face claims for punitive damages when the facts and applicable legal requirements support them. That is an important distinction from public school districts, which are generally immune from punitive damages under California law.

There is no guarantee, however, that a private or religious school has greater insurance coverage than a public district. Public schools may have insurance, participate in public-entity risk pools, or maintain self-insured arrangements. The Torrance settlement is a good example of how significant insurance coverage can exist on the public school side.

Los Angeles School Sexual Abuse Settlements and Verdicts

The results below provide examples of how Los Angeles juries and public entities have valued documented school-abuse claims. Read them with the facts beside the number.

The nature and duration of the abuse makes a big difference. So do the survivor’s age (younger leads to higher values), the relationship with the abuser, and the quality of the liability evidence. A documented complaint made before the plaintiff was abused can change the value of a case because it shows the school had a specific opportunity to intervene and did not.

Public school cases also have practical constraints. Punitive damages are unavailable against a public entity. Insurance, self-insured retention, public funds, and the number of related claimants can affect collectability and settlement structure. A private school may present a different mix of insurance, corporate assets, religious entities, and potential punitive exposure.

SB 577 adds another consideration for certain public-school cases. Under the new law, courts may consider the public entity’s mission and financial circumstances when deciding motions to reduce some verdicts, and a public entity may elect to have damages paid over time. The amount a jury awards and the amount and timing of a final recovery can therefore be different questions.

Our lawyers do not calculate a Los Angeles school sexual abuse settlement by averaging headline verdicts. We start with the survivor’s history and damages, then work outward through the school records. That gives us a much better idea of what the particular case is actually worth.

For more background on these cases outside Los Angeles, see our California school sexual abuse lawsuits page and our national school sexual abuse lawsuit coverage.

Los Angeles School Sexual Abuse Lawsuit FAQs

Can I sue LAUSD for abuse by a teacher or coach?

Yes, if administrators, supervisors, or other district employees were negligent and that negligence contributed to the abuse. Negligence claims usually involve negligent supervision and failing to fire a teacher who should have been fired for predatory behavior. But generally, the school must have been negligent to have a viable liability claim. Do we find that in every single case? No. But it is frightening how often a trail of evidence exists if anyone cared enough to follow it.

What is your firm’s age limit for Los Angeles school sexual abuse cases?

Miller & Zois is currently accepting school sexual abuse claims only from survivors who are under 40 years old when their lawsuit is filed. This is our firm’s intake policy. California law may permit some survivors age 40 or older to pursue claims, but we are not currently taking those cases.

Can a Los Angeles school be liable for abuse by another student?

Yes, although we always say these claims are more difficult than teacher/student claims. But, in many cases, the facts support a claim that the school had information that there could be a problem. There is also a lot of inadequate supervision of students that leads to peer sexual abuse.

Can I bring a claim against a Los Angeles private or religious school?

Yes. There are some advantages when suing private schools in sexual abuse cases because there is the possibility of punitive damages when the evidence supports them. Public school districts are generally immune from punitive damages, although they may still face substantial compensatory claims. Both public and private schools may have insurance or other funds available to pay a settlement or verdict.

Can I sue a Catholic school in Los Angeles?

Yes. A Catholic school or another religious school may be liable when negligence by the school or an affiliated institution contributed to sexual abuse. The investigation may involve school administrators, the archdiocese, a religious order, and the institution that employed or supervised the abuser. The Archdiocese of Los Angeles entered an $880 million settlement in 2024 involving approximately 1,353 childhood sexual abuse claims. That settlement was broader than school-based abuse alone, so it is not a direct measure of the value of an individual Catholic school case. Our firm currently reviews school sexual abuse claims for survivors under 40.

What if I cannot remember the teacher’s full name?

We can still usually figure it out pretty easily. The campus, approximate school years, subject, team, or physical description is usually enough. Yearbooks, archived staff directories, credential records, classmates, and district records also help identify the culprit.

Can I file a school sexual abuse lawsuit anonymously?

In many California childhood sexual abuse cases, survivors may use initials or a pseudonym in public court filings. There may also be ways to protect sensitive medical, counseling, and school records through confidentiality orders. Complete anonymity is not guaranteed, and the defendants and court may need to know the plaintiff’s identity. But filing a civil case does not automatically mean every detail of what happened has to become public.

Can I file if the abuse happened years ago?

Possibly. California has expanded the time available for many California school sexual assault claims, and abuse occurring on or after January 1, 2024 generally has no civil filing deadline. Earlier claims require an individual analysis under the statute that applies to the date of abuse and the survivor’s circumstances.

SB 577 adds important restrictions for certain older claims, especially some claims against public entities filed by people age 40 or older. Our law firm is currently accepting only school sexual abuse claims where the survivor is under 40 when filing. Older survivors may still have legal rights and should have another California attorney review the circumstances.

Does SB 577 prevent survivors over age 40 from suing LAUSD?

No. SB 577 imposes additional requirements on certain claims against public entities involving sexual abuse before January 1, 2024. Those requirements include a higher burden of proof for some survivors who were 40 or older when they filed. Whether the law applies depends on the filing date, defendant, available evidence, and other details. Our firm does not currently accept school sexual abuse cases filed by survivors age 40 or older, but that is our screening decision, not a universal legal bar.

How much is a Los Angeles school sexual abuse settlement worth?

There is no reliable average for all Los Angeles school sexual abuse lawsuits. Reported results have ranged from individual settlements to multimillion-dollar jury verdicts and large group settlements. We look at the nature and duration of the abuse, the survivor’s injuries, what the school knew, the liability evidence, insurance, and the laws governing the defendant. The specific facts are much more useful than a mathematical average of unrelated cases.

Talk to Our Los Angeles School Sexual Abuse Lawyers

You may remember the campus and the person who hurt you without knowing who inside the school received an earlier complaint. That is enough. Our lawyers will conduct the first investigation confidentially, identify the district or private entity, locate former students and employees, and send preservation demands before electronic records disappear.

Our firm is currently reviewing school sexual abuse claims for survivors under age 40. Again, this is our intake criterion, not a California legal eligibility rule.

If you meet that requirement and have a claim, we want to talk to you. Call us today at 800-553-8082 or contact us online. The consultation is confidential, and there is no fee unless we recover compensation for you.