Massachusetts Sex Abuse Lawsuits

If you were the victim of sexual abuse or assault, either as a child or an adult, you have the right to bring a civil lawsuit against both your abuser and any school, company, or organization that might be liable for the abuse.

In this post, we will provide a brief overview of sexual abuse lawsuits in Massachusetts. Our lawyers explain the Massachusetts statute of limitations for sex abuse civil cases and the potential settlement amounts you might see if you bring a claim.  We will also discuss how a new proposed law in Massachusetts could make it much easier for child sex abuse victims to bring lawsuits.

If you have a Massachusetts sex abuse case, contact our law firm today for a free consultation at 800-553-8082.

• Dr. Derrick Todd Sex Abuse Lawsuits
• Massachusetts Personal Injury Law and Settlements

Massachusetts Sex Abuse News & Updates

January 21, 2025: Matt Rutledge, a long-time history teacher at Miss Hall School, an elite all-girls boarding school, has been accused of sexual misconduct by multiple former students, with allegations dating back to the 1990s. Despite reports, the school’s administration allegedly failed to take appropriate action, leading to further trauma among victims.

January 20, 2025: Dr. Derrick Todd (see the link above) was indicted on charges of rape.

January 10, 2025: A new Massachusetts sex abuse appellate opinion came out that, while unreported, is really important.

In the case of C.C. v. B.L., the Massachusetts Appeals Court addressed the statute of limitations in cases of sexual assault where injuries manifest over time. The plaintiff, who alleged that she was violently raped by the defendant in 2015, filed a lawsuit in 2023 after discovering in 2020 that her gastrointestinal issues were directly linked to the trauma of the assaults.  Obviously, this is not something you would connect right away.

Still, the trial judge dismissed her case, ruling that the statute of limitations began in 2015 when she was aware of the rapes. Thankfully, the decision was reversed on appeal. The court  relied on the discovery rule, which allows the statute of limitations to commence only when a plaintiff reasonably becomes aware of the harm and its connection to the defendant’s actions. The court found that the plaintiff’s later diagnosis of pelvic floor dysfunction and related complications created a factual question as to when she should have reasonably known the connection, making dismissal premature.

This ruling demonstrates the nuances of the discovery rule in sexual abuse lawsuits in Massachusetts, particularly in cases where injuries from sexual assault are not immediately apparent or are misattributed to other causes. The court reinforced that plaintiffs may bring claims for injuries that are “separate and distinct” from those initially apparent and that the accrual of such claims depends on when the harm and its cause become reasonably known. This decision underscores the importance of considering delayed manifestations of injuries in sexual abuse cases and leaves room for survivors to pursue legal action even years after the underlying assault if they only later connect their injuries to the abuse.  More practically, it shows courts will bend to give sex abuse victims a shot to have their day in court.

For survivors of sexual abuse, this case is significant because it strengthens the possibility of legal recourse for injuries that manifest or are diagnosed long after the abuse occurs. By applying the discovery rule to later-arising injuries, the court ensures that survivors are not unfairly barred from seeking justice due to the delayed effects of trauma or medical conditions stemming from the abuse. It also places the burden on defendants to demonstrate that plaintiffs knew or should have known of the connection earlier, ensuring fairer consideration of the challenges survivors face in recognizing and addressing the full scope of their injuries.   What this often means is that the statute of limitations is a jury question. In a sex abuse lawsuit where the victim was abused, this is often all you need to win (and, more likely, get a reasonable settlement payout before that ever happens).

January 8, 2025: A Boston-area Catholic priest, previously known for his advocacy against clergy abuse, now faces allegations of sexual misconduct. A lawsuit accuses the priest of coercing a 20-year-old Brandeis University student into non-consensual oral sex during a 2014 trip to New York City. The allegations contribute to the growing focus on Massachusetts clergy abuse and raise new questions about institutional failures to prevent such misconduct. The priest, who served as a chaplain at Brandeis at the time, denies the allegations but acknowledges the trip and the identity of the accuser.

December 29, 2024: Five women have filed a civil lawsuit against former pediatrician Dr. Richard Kauff and his employer, South Shore Medical Center, alleging years of sexual abuse during routine medical visits. The suit accuses Kauff, who practiced for about 40 years at South Shore Medical Center’s Norwell and Kingston offices, of performing unnecessary pelvic, vaginal, and breast exams, causing severe emotional distress.

This lawsuit follows another case filed by a Marshfield woman in August, alleging Kauff sexually abused her as a minor. Adding extra credibility to these allegations, Dr. Kauff also faces criminal charges from 15 former patients, including 11 counts of child rape and nine counts of assault and battery on a child under 14.

November 15, 2024:  In a new lawsuit filed today in Middlesex Superior Court, a Massachusetts woman alleges she was sexually assaulted during a massage at L&Z Organic Spa LLC in Arlington. The plaintiff’s lawsuit alleges that a licensed massage therapist at the facility engaged in non-consensual sexual acts during the session. Specifically, he penetrated the plaintiff’s vagina with his fingers, with a vibrator, and with his mouth. He also massaged her breasts repeatedly.

The plaintiff went directly to the Arlington Police Department to report what happened.   After reporting the assault, she sought medical care from Cambridge Health Alliance and requested a SANE examination. An examination revealed redness around her vaginal opening and bilateral vaginal walls.

The complaint also asserts that L&Z Organic Spa LLC and its manager negligently hired, retained, and failed to supervise the therapist, despite a known history of prior sexual assault allegations.  This was not the first time for the message therapist.  He was previously arrested for sexually assaulting a patient during a massage.

Because this case is filed in federal court, it automatically becomes part of a larger Multi-District Litigation (MDL) in which all similar lawsuits against Uber nationwide are consolidated. MDLs are established to streamline the legal process when there are numerous cases across the country involving similar facts, legal issues, and claims—in this case, involving allegations of assault and harassment during Uber rides. In an MDL like this, while each individual plaintiff’s claims remain separate, the MDL process aims to address common questions and facilitate settlement discussions to get to a global resolution.

November 1, 2024:  In a new sex trafficking lawsuit filed in federal court this week, a Massachusetts woman alleges she was subjected to sex trafficking at multiple hotel chains, including Choice Hotels, Wyndham Hotels, IHG, Red Roof Inns, and Extended Stay America, from 2014 to 2015.

According to the complaint, her traffickers used rooms at these hotels to force her into non-consensual commercial sex acts with multiple individuals daily. The lawsuit claims that hotel staff ignored all of the obvious signs of trafficking to anyone who cared—excessive foot traffic, visible signs of abuse, and suspicious interactions.  Instead, everyone looked the other way.

The plaintiff alleges that the hotel chains benefited financially from her trafficking through room rentals and associated services while failing to implement or enforce anti-trafficking policies. The lawsuit invokes the Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act and the Child Abuse Victim’s Rights Act, asserting that the defendants knowingly profited from trafficking ventures and neglected their legal duties to prevent such exploitation. She seeks compensatory and punitive damages for the awful physical, emotional, and psychological harm she endured.

October 1, 2024: Gov. Healy signed into law a new bill eliminating a legal loophole that made it difficult to prosecute doctors and clergy members for sexual assault. Under the prior law in Massachusetts, bringing sexual assault charges against clergy and doctors was difficult because the legal definition of consent was so broad. Victims groups had been pushing for this change for a long time and after being stalled in committee for years, the new law was finally passed.

September 3, 2024: Massachusetts has moved one step closer to completely eliminating any statute of limitations for civil sex abuse cases. A new bill was approved by the state house of representatives that eliminates the statute of limitations for civil cases involving people who sexually abused a minor or who were negligent in supervising a person who sexually abused a minor. The bill must now be approved by the state senate.

July 5, 2024:  A bill in Massachusetts aims to expand the definitions and scope of certain sexual offenses committed by healthcare providers and clergy. The bill includes new offenses such as rape of a patient by a healthcare provider, indecent assault and battery on vulnerable persons in law enforcement custody, and indecent assault and battery on a patient by a healthcare provider. (The Derrick Todd debacle was no small trigger for the healthcare provider provisions.)

June 15, 2024: A new federal lawsuit seeking millions in damages was filed against the Amherst-Pelham Regional Public Schools and several current and former administrators by a special education teacher and former union leader.

The plaintiff, now serving as the Dean of Students at Amherst Regional Middle School, claims she faced defamation and retaliation for advocating for marginalized students and questioning labor practices. The 27-page lawsuit details events from October 2022 to November 2023, including her alleged wrongful termination in August 2023 and subsequent reinstatement. Additionally, she was placed as Dean of Students in September 2023 but claims she was denied promotion to an administrator role.

The lawsuit also includes a defamation claim, citing an incident where a former district official allegedly distributed defamatory flyers about her and two other employees at a school committee meeting.

The plaintiff is currently on medical leave, receiving treatment for trauma related to the alleged actions of the defendants.

May 3, 2024: A second former teacher at Miss Hall all-girls private school in Pittsfield, MA has now been accused of sexually abusing students. A group of 5 former students at the school claim that their former history teacher, Matthew Rutledge, sexually abused them when they were students. Similar allegations were made against another teacher at the same school last month.

April 3, 2024: In Doe v. City of Holyoke, plaintiffs, including one adult and three minors, alleged that Holyoke High School North administrators and staff responded with deliberate indifference to multiple incidents of sexual assault and harassment on school grounds. The plaintiffs, asserting claims under § 1983, Title IX, and Massachusetts state law, argued that the failure to provide adequate support, conduct investigations, or implement safety measures violated their rights to personal security, bodily integrity, and equal access to education. The opinion is light on the specific details but incidents ranged from peer-on-peer assaults to misconduct by one of the school’s paraprofessionals. The plaintiffs sought damages for harms caused by the lack of action and flawed investigations, which they claimed led to mental health struggles, educational setbacks, and a hostile school environment.

The court partially dismissed some of the claims. It found that Doe 1’s claims were time-barred under the applicable statute of limitations. Section 1983 claims against the City and HPS were dismissed, as state-appointed receivers controlled policymaking during the relevant period. Claims against the receivers were dismissed due to insufficient allegations of deliberate indifference. While claims against the school administrator were dismissed, a claim against principal survived, alleging her failure to act on a harassment report led to further harm. The Title IX claims against HPS survived, with the court finding plausible allegations of deliberate indifference. State law claims under Mass. Gen. Laws c. 214, § 1C, for sexual harassment by a teacher, were also allowed to proceed against the school system and the City.

March 1, 2024: Lawmakers in Massachusetts are considering a new law that would eliminated the state’s cap on damages in civil lawsuits against nonprofit charitable organizations. Current state law caps damages against nonprofits’ at $20,000.

Definition of Sex Abuse in Massachusetts

The legal definition of sexual abuse or sexual assault in Massachusetts is pretty much the same as it is in every other state. Massachusetts defines sexual abuse is as any intentional “sexual touching” without consent. There are 2 key parts or elements to this definition: (1) sexual touching, and (2) lack of consent.

Sexual touching is basically and type of contact or touching of another person’s sexual organs with intent and for the purpose of sexual gratification. Accidentally touching a woman’s breasts in the elevator does not amount to sexual abuse — but deliberately fondling her breasts does.

The other key element that makes something qualify as sexual abuse is the lack of consent. If the sexual touching is done without consent it is automatically abuse or assault. Minors (anyone under the age of 18) lack the legal capacity to give consent, which means any sexual touching by an adult with a minor is necessarily considered sexual abuse.

Who Can Be Held Liable for Sex Abuse in Massachusetts?

Victims of sexual abuse or assault can obviously sue the individual person that actually committed the acts of abuse. In many cases, however, suing the abusers is somewhat pointless because unless that person is very wealthy, you won’t be able to get any money out of them.

Fortunately, Massachusetts law allows abuse victims to file civil lawsuits against third-parties who were negligent in failing to prevent or stop the abuse. Common third-party defendants in sex abuse civil lawsuits include schools, churches, or organizations such as the Boy Scouts. If you can show that the one of these organizations had a duty to prevent or stop the abuse and failed to do so, they can be held legally liable for damages.

Almost any third party (other than the abuser) can be held liable in a sexual assault lawsuit if the third party’s negligence allowed the sexual assault or abuse to occur. One of the most common examples of this is negligent security cases in which a property owner is sued for failing to provide adequate security (e.g., cameras, lighting, etc.).

Holding Churches, Schools and 3^rd Parties Liable for Sex Abuse

The primary and most direct defendant in a sex abuse civil lawsuit is always the person who committed the abuse. The problem is that in most cases suing the individual abuser won’t get you anything because they won’t have money to pay any verdict or settlement (unless the individual is someone very wealthy like Harvey Weinstein or Donald Trump).

The best way to get money in a civil lawsuit for sexual abuse is to sue a third party for negligence in connection with the abuse. Common examples of third parties who can be sued in sex abuse lawsuits include schools, youth organizations (e.g., Boy Scouts), gyms, etc. These parties can be held liable in a civil case if the plaintiff can show that their negligence somehow enabled the abuse to occur or to continue. Third parties in sex abuse lawsuits can also be held liable if they attempted to cover up abuse incidents after the fact.

Let’s consider a very typical example of how third parties can be held liable for sex abuse. Let’s say that a guard at a juvenile detention facility is sexually abusing inmates. Several of these victims file complaints, but the facility basically ignores them and allows the guard to continue his abuse. The victim can file a civil lawsuit against the detention facility (or the state agency that operates it) for negligently failing to investigate and protect them from abuse.

Statute of Limitation for Sex Abuse Lawsuits in Massachusetts

Massachusetts has a very favorable statute of limitation laws when it comes to sex abuse civil lawsuits, particularly cases involving child sex abuse. In 2014, Massachusetts amended its existing SOL law for claims based on child sexual abuse (i.e., abuse that occurred before the plaintiff turned 18). Child sex abuse victims in Massachusetts now have until their 53^rd birthday (age of majority plus 35 years) to file a civil lawsuit. Mass. Gen. Laws Ann. ch. 260, §§ 2A/

The 2014 amendment also revived old claims that had expired under the prior SOL (i.e., claims for abuse occurring years before the 2014 law was passed). However, the revival law only applied to lawsuits against the individual who perpetrated the sexual abuse. It does not apply to claims against third parties like churches or schools.

Calculating Massachusetts Sex Abuse Settlement Amounts

Sexual abuse settlements in Massachusetts are determined by weighing multiple factors, but the process begins with two critical thresholds. These hurdles must be cleared before a case can even move toward compensation:

1. Statute of Limitations:
   Massachusetts has extended its statute of limitations for childhood sexual abuse claims, allowing survivors to file lawsuits well into adulthood. However, the rules are nuanced. For instance, under current law, survivors can typically file until age 53, or within three years of recognizing the abuse caused their injuries. This flexibility opens doors for many cases, but timing is still crucial. Claims involving institutional cover-ups may have different deadlines, and missing these windows can shut down a case entirely.
2. Defendant’s Assets or Insurance:
   The second threshold is identifying a defendant with the financial means to pay a settlement. Survivors often sue institutions like churches, schools, or youth organizations, which are more likely to have insurance coverage or significant assets. If the abuser is the only defendant, recovery may be limited unless they have substantial personal wealth.

Once these initial hurdles are cleared, several other factors come into play when calculating a settlement:

Severity of the Abuse

The nature, frequency, and duration of the abuse heavily influence settlement amounts. Cases involving prolonged abuse, physical harm, or particularly egregious acts typically result in higher payouts. Courts and insurers also consider the emotional and psychological toll on the survivor, such as post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), anxiety, depression, or long-term trust issues.

Proof of the Abuse

While sexual abuse cases don’t always require physical evidence, the strength of the survivor’s testimony, corroborating witnesses, or institutional records (e.g., internal reports, complaints, or prior incidents) will significantly boost the value of a claim. Massachusetts juries and even defense lawyers and insurance adjusters for settlement are aware that abuse often occurs in secrecy and often just a credible plaintiff is more than enough. But solid proof helps substantiate claims and makes it harder for defendants to deny liability.

Institutional Negligence or Cover-Up

If the defendant is an institution that failed to protect victims or actively concealed the abuse, the settlement value often increases. For example, cases involving the Catholic Church have demonstrated that clear evidence of a cover-up can lead to substantial payouts because juries and insurers view the negligence which borders on intentional conduct as particularly egregious.

Emotional and Psychological Damages

The courts recognize that sexual abuse has lasting emotional and psychological impacts, often awarding compensation for these non-economic damages. Survivors are often entitled to compensation for therapy costs, emotional distress, and the long-term impact on their quality of life.

A Good Lawyer Makes a Difference

Perhaps the most critical factor after clearing the initial hurdles is having an experienced lawyer who knows how to maximize settlement payouts. Skilled attorneys understand how to present the survivor’s story compellingly, negotiate with insurers, and push back against defense strategies aimed at minimizing liability. They know how to find key evidence, leverage expert testimony, and calculate the full scope of damages—ensuring the survivor does not leave money on the table. A good lawyer also understands the value of timing, whether it’s negotiating a settlement before trial or taking the case to a jury when necessary.

Massachusetts Sex Abuse Lawsuit Settlement Amounts and Jury Payouts

Below are some example Massachusetts sex abuse settlement amounts or jury payouts. These sample results provide valuable insight into how settlement compensation payouts may be determined in these types of lawsuits. The lawsuits offer a framework for understanding some of the factors that influence compensation—such as the severity of the abuse, the impact on the survivor, and the presence of institutional negligence

But…there are limits to how you use these results.  No two cases are identical. Settlement amounts will vary wildly based on a wide range of variables, not just the things we have been talking about the defendant’s financial resources, the availability of insurance coverage, the severity of the abuse, etc.  Additionally, remember that substantial recoveries typically require a liable institution or an insured defendant. A large jury verdict against an individual without assets or insurance provides no practical financial recovery for the survivor. You need to identify responsible parties with the means to satisfy a judgment or settlement to really get justice in these claims, no matter how tragic they are.

• $1,400,000 Settlement: The Order of Saint Augustine (a branch of the Catholic Church) agreed to a $1.4 million settlement with a group of 11 victims. The victims alleged that they were sexually abused by Reverend John Gallagher in the 1970s. Gallagher was a known pedophile who worked at St. Mary’s Parish and school in Lawrence Mass.
• $250,000 Verdict: Female plaintiff sued her stepfather claiming that he sexually molested the plaintiff from the ages of 7 through 17 through the use of physical force, threats and mental coercion. The plaintiff filed a lawsuit as an adult against the defendant and contended the defendant committed battery against her as a result of his repeated intentional and deliberate acts of rape, fondling and molestation upon the plaintiff’s body; that the defendant’s conduct was extreme and outrageous and amounted to intentional infliction of emotional distress; that the defendant falsely imprisoned her by restraining her in a bounded area without her consent; and invaded her privacy by intruding on her seclusion or solitude while she slept or bathed.
• $4,500,000 Settlement: The Diocese of Springfield, MA agreed to a $4.5 million settlement to compensate a group of 59 individuals who claim that they were victims of sexual abuse committed by various clergy members. The group of accused priests included 18 individuals, whose names were publicly released.
• $70,000 Settlement: A 13-year-old male student was allegedly sexually abused by the defendant teacher at the defendant private school. The school had discerned that the defendant teacher had abused four boys, one of which was the plaintiff. The teacher was counseled by the defendant psychologist and pled guilty to raping his nephew and sexually abusing another boy. The headmaster failed to report the abuse.  The plaintiff alleged that the defendants were negligent for failing to report the molestations to the state. The defendants contended that they had held informational services for parents and students instead of reporting the situation.
• $30,000 Settlement: A 13-year-old girl was sexually molested by the male defendant, her mother’s cousin, at a family gathering. The defendant was charged by the police with indecent assault and battery. The defendant admitted liability. The plaintiff contended that the female co-defendant, the defendant’s wife, also was liable due to her knowledge of the defendant’s propensity to commit such an act. The settlement was paid 50 percent by the defendant’s insurance company and 50 percent by the defendant.
• $97,000 Verdict: A 16-year-old female alleged that she suffered sexual molestation when she was assaulted by the nonparty physician’s assistant in the course and scope of his employment with the defendants. The plaintiff contended that the defendants failed to properly hire, train and supervise its employees, that the nonparty male physician’s assistant examination included parts of her body not related to the physical examination, that he willfully and intentionally engaged in unpermitted contact with intimate parts of her body, that it was not authorized by her medical needs, that the defendants breached its duty of care to the minor plaintiff, and failed to provide the proper standard of care.

Frequently Asked Questions About Massachusetts Sexual Abuse Lawsuits

Can I sue an institution for sexual abuse in Massachusetts?

Yes, you can sue institutions like schools, churches, or youth organizations if their negligence enabled the abuse to occur. Typcially, this the only way to get justice in a sexual assault or abuse lawsuit. Institutions are liable if they failed to prevent abuse, ignored warning signs, or covered up incidents. For example, in many Massachusetts clergy abuse cases, institutions have been sued for enabling or concealing misconduct. Pursuing claims against institutions dramatically increases the likelihood of a financial recovery. Becausse these organizations typically have assets or insurance to cover settlements payouts.

How do Massachusetts clergy abuse lawsuits differ from other sexual abuse cases?

Massachusetts clergy abuse lawsuits often involve both individual perpetrators and the church institutions that shielded them. These cases frequently uncover long-standing systemic failures, such as covering up abuse or reassigning clergy instead of addressing allegations. The damages in these cases may include punitive awards, especially if institutional negligence or intentional concealment is proven.

How do I determine the potential value of my Massachusetts sex abuse lawsuit?

We talk about this above. The value of a lawsuit depends on factors like the severity of the abuse, the long-term impact on your physical and emotional health, and the financial resources of the defendant. Cases involving institutional negligence, such as those in Massachusetts clergy abuse lawsuits, tend to have higher settlement payouts. Survivors may recover compensation for medical expenses, therapy costs, lost wages, and emotional distress.

How do I prove my case in a Massachusetts sexual abuse lawsuit?

Proof can include medical records, therapy notes, witness testimony, or institutional documentation of prior complaints.  But remember that often the only proof needed is your word. Massachusetts juries recognize that sexual abuse often occurs in secrecy. So a survivor’s testimony is often sufficient to establish credibility. Strong evidence of institutional negligence, such as failure to act on abuse reports, will, again, significantly strengthen a case.

Contact Us About Massachusetts Sex Abuse Lawsuits

If you have a potential lawsuit in Massachusetts for sexual abuse or assault, contact our attorneys today at 800-553-8082 or contact us online