Federal judge dismisses Las Vegas woman's abuse lawsuit against Latter-day Saints church but lets her amend her claim

What happened

A federal judge on Wednesday dismissed a lawsuit from a woman who alleges The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints in Las Vegas allowed a high priest to sexually abuse her when she was a child, the Las Vegas Review-Journal reported. U.S. District Judge Jennifer Dorsey granted the church's motion to dismiss and wrote that the woman's negligence claims were "rife with deficiencies."

The ruling does not necessarily end the case. Dorsey said she would allow the plaintiff to amend her lawsuit within 10 days, according to the Review-Journal.

What the lawsuit alleges

The plaintiff and the ward

The woman, identified in the order as Jane Doe C.H., filed the case in January and is not named in the complaint. Her attorney, Margot Cutter, said the woman was a church member and that the high priest served at the East Stake 1st Ward on East Wyoming Avenue near Interstate 11.

According to the filing, the priest was ordained within the church and was responsible for counseling and teaching members of the congregation. Cutter alleged that he raped the woman in the 1990s, when she was between 10 and 15 years old. The priest was not named in the Review-Journal's report, and the allegations have not been proven in court.

The report to the bishop

The suit also alleges that in 1999 the girl told the church's bishop, who oversees the ward, about the abuse, and that he told her not to call the police. "The Bishop assured her that the Church would 'handle' the situation," Cutter wrote in the complaint, as quoted by the Review-Journal.

The complaint goes on to allege that the church instead informed the accused priest about the girl's disclosure and did nothing meaningful to prevent further harm.

Why the judge dismissed the claims

No general duty tied to membership

Dorsey's order centered on whether the law requires a church to protect a member in this situation. She wrote that the woman's negligence theories fail because she has not shown "that the law recognizes such a duty in these circumstances."

The order said no court has recognized a general duty for churches to protect members from crimes by fellow congregants based only on their membership in the church, the Review-Journal reported.

No special circumstances alleged

The judge also noted that the lawsuit did not allege the abuse took place under special circumstances, such as a church-sponsored youth group or camp, where parents give up control of their child to the church. Those kinds of settings were offered in the order as examples of situations the complaint did not describe.

A narrower path to refile

While the negligence claims were dismissed, Dorsey indicated an amended claim could rely on a different theory, according to the Review-Journal. Under that approach, the woman would argue that when the bishop said he would handle the situation, the church voluntarily took on responsibility to protect her.

That theory rests on the alleged 1999 conversation with the bishop rather than on any general duty that comes with church membership. Whether the woman pursues it is up to her and her attorney within the window the judge set. More court coverage is collected on our public safety page.

What to watch next

• Whether the plaintiff files an amended lawsuit within the 10 days Dorsey allowed.
• Whether any amended complaint argues the church voluntarily took on a duty to protect her when the bishop said it would handle the situation.
• How the federal court responds to any amended claim.