Skip to content If you or someone you love experienced sexual abuse, sexual assault or other non-consensual sexual contact in Oregon, SurvivorsRights.com may help connect you with an attorney who can explain your rights and whether you may have a claim.
If you or someone you love experienced sexual abuse or assault, deciding whether to explore a legal claim can feel overwhelming. There is no single “right” time to take action, and the decision to move forward is yours.
An experienced Oregon sexual abuse attorney can explain your rights, evaluate whether you may have a claim, identify potentially responsible individuals or institutions, and help you understand what to expect.
These cases can involve complicated filing deadlines, institutional liability, insurance coverage, confidential records and evidence of abuse that may have occurred years or even decades ago. An attorney who regularly handles sexual abuse claims should understand those issues and know where to look for evidence.
A civil claim can involve more than financial compensation. For some survivors, it may also provide a measure of accountability and an opportunity to have what happened formally recognized.
An attorney can communicate with defendants and insurers on your behalf, gather records and other evidence, evaluate potential sources of liability, negotiate a possible settlement and, when appropriate, pursue the case in court. Throughout the process, you should remain in control of the major decisions about how you want to proceed.
If you’re considering a legal claim, an attorney can help you understand whether Oregon law still gives you a path forward and what that process may involve.
That can include reviewing filing deadlines, identifying potentially responsible individuals or institutions, gathering records and other evidence, communicating with defendants and insurers, and negotiating a possible settlement. If a fair resolution isn’t reached, an attorney may also pursue the case in court.
Sexual abuse claims can involve conduct that happened years or even decades ago, so experience matters. These cases may involve institutional liability, confidential records, insurance issues and questions about when a survivor first understood the impact of the abuse.
Just as important, you should remain in control of the major decisions. A survivor-focused attorney should explain your options clearly, answer your questions and help you decide how, or whether, you want to move forward.
In some cases, an Oregon sexual abuse attorney may work with expert witnesses such as psychologists, physicians, medical specialists, economists, or other professionals. Experts may help explain the psychological, medical, or financial effects of abuse and provide specialized testimony when those issues are relevant to the claim.
Sexual abuse cases may involve highly sensitive information, including medical or counseling records, photographs, electronic communications and witness statements. An experienced Oregon sexual abuse attorney can help determine what evidence may be relevant while taking steps to protect your privacy and limit unnecessary disclosure of personal information.
When abuse occurs in connection with a school, religious organization, healthcare facility, youth program, residential facility, employer or other institution, responsibility may extend beyond the person who committed the abuse.
An attorney may investigate whether the institution knew or should have known about a risk of abuse, ignored complaints or warning signs, failed to properly hire or supervise staff, or otherwise failed to protect people in its care. Depending on the facts, a survivor may be able to pursue a claim against the institution as well as the individual perpetrator.
A sexual abuse attorney’s primary role is legal representation, not counseling. However, attorneys who regularly work with survivors may be familiar with local advocates, counseling services and other support organizations.
Oregon also offers assistance through its Oregon’s Crime Victims’ Compensation Program, and county Victim Assistance Programs.
A sexual abuse attorney’s primary role is legal representation, not counseling. However, attorneys who regularly handle survivor cases may be familiar with local victim advocates, counseling resources, support organizations, and other services that can provide additional assistance during the legal process.
Oregon also provides resources through its Crime Victim and Survivor Services Division and county Victim Assistance Programs, which can help crime victims understand their rights and connect with community resources.
Whether you live in Portland, Salem, Eugene, Bend, Medford or a smaller Oregon community, you may not need to travel far to explore your legal options. Many attorneys now offer initial consultations by phone or video and may be able to handle much of a case remotely.
SurvivorsRights.com may help connect you with an Oregon sexual abuse attorney who handles cases in your area, including rural and coastal communities.
What matters most is finding an attorney who understands Oregon sexual abuse law and has experience with the type of claim you may be considering, whether it involves a school, church, healthcare provider, youth program, residential facility, employer or another institution.
If you want to learn more about your options, you can request a confidential case review. Speaking with an attorney does not obligate you to file a claim.
SurvivorsRights.com may help connect you with attorneys who handle many types of sexual abuse and assault claims in Oregon. The legal issues can vary based on when the abuse occurred, how old you were at the time and whether an institution may share responsibility.
Oregon changed its civil statute-of-limitations law in 2025. House Bill 3582 took effect on June 26, 2025 and eliminated the filing deadline for qualifying civil claims based on child sexual abuse arising on or after that date.
Older claims are more complicated. HB 3582 did not create a blanket revival window for every previously expired claim. For claims arising before June 26, 2025, the applicable deadline may still depend on the earlier version of Oregon law, which generally allowed filing until age 40 or within five years after discovering the connection between the abuse and the resulting injury.
The law also removed the word “knowingly” from provisions involving people or institutions accused of allowing, permitting or encouraging child sexual abuse. That change may matter in cases involving schools, churches, youth programs, residential facilities and other organizations accused of failing to prevent abuse.
Because the deadline can depend on when the abuse occurred and the type of claim being pursued, survivors with older claims should not assume they are either eligible or ineligible based on age alone.
Sexual abuse claims involving churches or religious organizations may involve priests, pastors, clergy members, employees, volunteers or the institutions themselves. Depending on the facts, a claim may also examine whether church leaders ignored warning signs, mishandled complaints or failed to take reasonable steps to protect children and other vulnerable people.
Notable Oregon Case: Nearly $4 Million Archdiocese of Portland Settlement
In 2019, the Archdiocese of Portland agreed to pay nearly $4 million to eight people who alleged they were sexually abused as children by the Rev. Pius Brazauskas during the 1970s and 1980s. The allegations involved abuse on the Oregon coast, including claims involving altar boys at Holy Redeemer Catholic Church in North Bend.
The settlement was part of a much longer history of clergy-abuse litigation involving the archdiocese. In 2004, the Archdiocese of Portland became the first Catholic diocese in the United States to seek bankruptcy protection because of clergy sexual abuse claims. Its bankruptcy concluded in 2007 with a reorganization plan providing approximately $75 million to resolve roughly 175 pending abuse claims.
Over the broader course of the litigation, the archdiocese reportedly resolved more than 300 abuse claims and paid nearly $90 million in claims and attorney fees.
Sexual abuse by a doctor, nurse, therapist or other healthcare professional can involve a serious abuse of trust. Depending on the facts, a survivor may have claims against the individual provider and, in some cases, against a clinic, hospital, medical group or other organization that employed, supervised or credentialed that person.
Notable Oregon Case: Sexual Abuse Claims Against Dr. David Farley
Former West Linn physician Dr. David Farley has been accused by more than 100 former patients of sexual abuse and misconduct during medical examinations, including allegations involving unnecessary or invasive breast, genital and rectal exams.
The legal history has changed significantly since this section was first written. Although a grand jury declined to indict Farley in 2022, the Oregon Department of Justice announced in October 2025 that a Clackamas County grand jury had indicted him on 11 felony charges involving three alleged victims.
Farley and several other defendants later reached settlements with former patients in related civil litigation. In February 2026, Providence Health, the final remaining defendant, also settled, canceling a civil trial that had been scheduled to begin that month. The settlement amounts were not publicly disclosed.
Older adults and people who rely on caregivers may be especially vulnerable to abuse because of physical limitations, cognitive impairment, isolation or dependence on staff for daily care.
Sexual abuse in a nursing home, assisted-living facility or other care setting may lead to claims against the individual accused of abuse and, depending on the facts, the facility responsible for hiring, supervising or protecting residents.
Notable Oregon Case: Grants Pass Care Facility Employee Arrested
In June 2024, Grants Pass police arrested Michael Anthony Lee, a certified nursing assistant, after allegations of sexual abuse involving elderly residents at a local care facility.
Police said the investigation began after the facility reported an alleged incident. Investigators later identified both male and female alleged victims. Lee faced two counts of first-degree sexual abuse and two counts of attempted first-degree sexual abuse, and authorities asked anyone with information about possible additional victims to contact investigators.
Young people in juvenile correctional facilities can be especially vulnerable because staff control nearly every aspect of daily life. Lawsuits involving the Oregon Youth Authority allege that some employees sexually abused youth in custody while supervisors and other staff failed to report, investigate or prevent misconduct.
Depending on the facts, survivors may have claims against individual perpetrators as well as the state or other responsible parties if officials knew about abuse, ignored complaints or failed to protect youth in their care.
Notable Oregon Litigation: Sexual Abuse Lawsuits Against the Oregon Youth Authority
The litigation began expanding rapidly in 2024 and 2025, with former OYA youth alleging sexual abuse at facilities including MacLaren Youth Correctional Facility and Oak Creek Youth Correctional Facility.
A major group of claims involves former MacLaren physician Dr. Edward Gary Edwards. By September 2025, more than 70 Edwards-related cases had been moved to federal court, where they were assigned to U.S. District Judge Michael McShane.
The litigation has continued to grow. By July 2026, at least 125 former youth were plaintiffs across pending OYA sexual abuse lawsuits. Thirteen former OYA employees also submitted sworn statements supporting allegations that agency leadership knew about serious problems but failed to adequately respond.
Several important rulings came in April 2026, when Judge McShane rejected motions to dismiss claims brought by former OYA youth, allowing those cases to move forward.
The first Edwards-related trial is scheduled to begin November 2, 2026, with additional trials expected in 2027.
For survivors who experienced sexual abuse in an Oregon juvenile facility, these cases show why it can be important to investigate not only what an individual staff member did, but also what administrators knew, how complaints were handled and whether unsafe conditions were allowed to continue.
Sexual abuse can occur in K-12 schools, colleges, universities and other educational settings. Depending on the circumstances, claims may involve teachers, coaches, administrators, staff members, volunteers or other students.
A civil case may also examine whether a school or district ignored warning signs, mishandled complaints, failed to supervise employees or otherwise failed to protect students.
Notable Oregon Case: St. Helens School District Sexual Abuse Litigation
In March 2024, the St. Helens School District agreed to pay $3.5 million to a former student who alleged teacher and coach Kyle Wroblewski sexually abused her after district officials had received years of complaints about his conduct. OPB reported that concerns about Wroblewski dated back to 2005.
The district came under renewed scrutiny later that year after choir teacher Eric Stearns and retired teacher Mark Collins were arrested on allegations involving students. Superintendent Scot Stockwell and High School Principal Katy Wagner were placed on administrative leave, while School Board Chair Ryan Scholl resigned.
An independent investigation released in August 2025 found that district leaders had failed for years to adequately respond to allegations of sexual misconduct and abuse involving employees. The report identified repeated problems with documenting complaints, escalating concerns and responding to warning signs.
Separate reporting in 2025 also detailed allegations from two former students who said another former St. Helens teacher, Gene Evans, sexually abused them in the 1980s. Evans denied wrongdoing.
For survivors, the St. Helens cases show why a school sexual abuse claim may involve more than the conduct of one employee. It can also raise questions about what administrators knew, how prior complaints were handled and whether the district took reasonable steps to prevent further harm.
Children placed in foster care depend on foster parents, caseworkers, and state agencies for their safety and well-being. When sexual or physical abuse occurs, potential civil claims may involve not only the individual accused of abuse, but also agencies or officials who allegedly ignored warning signs, failed to investigate complaints, or placed a child in an unsafe home.
Notable Oregon Case: $40 Million Settlement Over Foster Care Abuse
In December 2023, the Oregon Department of Human Services agreed to pay $40 million to settle a federal lawsuit brought by four former foster children who alleged they were subjected to severe sexual and physical abuse while in state custody. The children had been placed with foster parents Melissa and Casey Miller in Keizer, despite allegations that warning signs and reports of abuse were not adequately addressed.
The lawsuit alleged that DHS caseworkers failed to act on evidence of abuse, including injuries, behavioral changes, and reports made by the children. One child was sexually abused by Casey Miller, who was later sentenced to 30 years in prison, while another suffered multiple untreated fractures. The settlement was reported at the time as a record payment by Oregon DHS in a foster-care abuse case.
For survivors, cases like this show why foster care abuse claims may involve broader questions of institutional responsibility. An Oregon sexual abuse attorney can investigate placement decisions, prior complaints, caseworker records, supervision practices, and whether the state or another responsible entity failed to take reasonable steps to protect a child.
People incarcerated in prisons and jails still have legal protections against sexual abuse by correctional officers, medical staff and other employees. Depending on the circumstances, survivors may have civil-rights or other civil claims in addition to remedies available through institutional reporting systems. The federal Prison Rape Elimination Act, or PREA, also establishes national standards intended to prevent, detect and respond to sexual abuse in confinement settings.
Notable Oregon Cases: Sexual Abuse at Coffee Creek Correctional Facility
Coffee Creek Correctional Facility, Oregon’s only women’s prison, has been the subject of multiple sexual-abuse cases involving employees who held positions of authority over incarcerated women.
For survivors, these cases show how the power imbalance inside correctional facilities can make abuse especially difficult to report. A civil claim may examine not only the conduct of an individual employee, but also whether correctional officials or agencies knew about risks, failed to respond to complaints or allowed unsafe conditions to continue.
Parents and caregivers rely on daycare centers and preschools to provide a safe environment for young children. When sexual abuse or exploitation occurs, claims may involve not only the person accused of misconduct, but also a facility that allegedly failed to supervise staff, enforce safety rules, respond to warning signs or protect children in its care.
Notable Oregon Case: $27 Million Lawsuit Against Ashland Montessori School
In April 2025, the parents of a young child filed a lawsuit seeking $27 million in damages from Children’s World Montessori School in Ashland. The lawsuit alleges that former teacher Craig Johnson sexually abused and exploited children while working at the school and that the institution failed to adequately respond to warning signs or follow its own safety procedures.
Johnson had previously been arrested following an investigation into alleged child exploitation involving children at the school. By September 2024, a Jackson County grand jury had indicted him on 23 charges, including multiple counts related to the use of a child in sexually explicit conduct, attempted offenses, encouraging child sex abuse and invasion of personal privacy. Authorities said at least six alleged victims had been identified at that stage.
The civil complaint also alleges that the school failed to enforce rules designed to prevent staff members from being alone with children in bathrooms and did not adequately respond to earlier concerns about Johnson’s conduct.
For families, the case illustrates why daycare and preschool abuse claims can raise broader questions about supervision, staff screening, safety policies and how an institution responded once concerns were raised.
Youth organizations, scouting programs and camps place adults in positions of trust and authority over children. When abuse occurs, claims may involve not only the individual accused of misconduct, but also an organization that allegedly failed to screen, supervise, remove or report someone who posed a risk.
Notable Oregon Case: $19.9 Million Verdict Against the Boy Scouts
In 2010, an Oregon jury awarded Kerry Lewis approximately $19.9 million after finding the Boy Scouts of America negligent in connection with sexual abuse he suffered as a child in the 1980s. The award included about $1.4 million in compensatory damages and $18.5 million in punitive damages.
The trial also brought national attention to the Boy Scouts’ confidential internal records concerning suspected abusers, commonly known as the “Perversion Files.” More than 1,000 such files were admitted as evidence, helping jurors evaluate what the organization knew about abuse risks and how it responded.
The case remains a significant Oregon example of how a sexual abuse lawsuit can examine institutional conduct in addition to the actions of an individual perpetrator.
The Boy Scouts litigation later expanded nationwide. After the organization entered bankruptcy, a $2.46 billion settlement plan was established for roughly 82,000 sexual abuse claimants. In January 2026, the U.S. Supreme Court declined to hear a challenge to the plan, allowing the settlement trust to continue compensating eligible survivors.
Coaches, trainers and other adults involved in youth sports can hold significant authority over young athletes. Sexual abuse claims may involve the individual accused of misconduct as well as a school, club, athletic program, camp or other organization that allegedly ignored complaints, failed to supervise staff or overlooked warning signs.
These cases can also raise questions about whether an organization had prior knowledge of concerning behavior and whether it took reasonable steps to protect athletes.
See the St. Helens School District case above for an Oregon example involving alleged sexual misconduct by school athletic staff.
| Issue | Current Oregon Rule |
|---|---|
| Child sexual abuse claims arising on or after June 26, 2025 | Qualifying civil claims may generally be filed at any time under HB 3582. |
| Older child sexual abuse claims | Older claims may still be governed by prior filing rules, including the age-40 or five-year discovery framework. |
| Adult sexual assault claims arising on or after June 26, 2025 | Qualifying civil claims may generally be filed at any time. |
| Older adult sexual assault claims | Earlier filing rules may still apply depending on when the claim arose and the legal theory involved. |
| Criminal prosecution | Deadlines vary by offense. Some serious first-degree sex crimes generally have a 20-year period, with additional rules for minor victims and DNA identification. |
| Mandatory reporting | Certain professionals must report suspected child abuse to authorities when Oregon law requires it. |
Oregon has made major changes to its sexual abuse laws in recent years, including a significant 2025 reform affecting how long survivors have to bring certain civil claims. The deadline can depend on when the abuse occurred, how old you were at the time and the type of claim involved, so an older claim is not automatically barred — or automatically revived.
Oregon House Bill 3582 took effect on June 26, 2025 and eliminated the civil statute of limitations for qualifying claims based on child sexual abuse and adult sexual assault arising on or after that date. Current Oregon law provides that these qualifying claims may be filed at any time.
The rules for older claims are more complicated. HB 3582 did not create a blanket revival window for every previously expired claim. Certain claims arising before June 26, 2025 remain subject to earlier filing rules, including the age-40/five-year discovery framework for some childhood claims and the prior five-year discovery rule for certain adult sexual-assault claims involving institutional or third-party liability.
Because the law treats older and newer claims differently, survivors should not assume that too much time has passed based on age alone.
Oregon’s criminal filing deadlines are separate from the rules governing civil lawsuits.
Under ORS 131.125, first-degree rape, first-degree sodomy, first-degree unlawful sexual penetration and first-degree sexual abuse generally may be prosecuted within 20 years. If the victim was younger than 18, prosecution may be brought before the victim turns 30 if that provides more time. DNA identification can extend the deadline further for certain offenses.
Other sexual offenses may have different deadlines, including six-year periods for certain felonies and special rules when the victim was a minor. Because the applicable criminal deadline depends on the specific offense and circumstances, it should be evaluated separately from any civil claim.
Oregon requires certain professionals to immediately report suspected child abuse when they have reasonable cause to believe a child has been abused or they come into contact with someone they believe abused a child.
Mandatory reporters include many healthcare providers, school employees, law-enforcement personnel, counselors, social workers, clergy members, childcare providers and others identified by Oregon law. Reports may be made to the Oregon Child Abuse Hotline or law enforcement.
Mandatory-reporting requirements are intended to protect children and trigger investigation. They are separate from a survivor’s right to bring a civil lawsuit.
Not every attorney who handles personal injury cases has experience with sexual abuse claims. These cases can involve delayed reporting, sensitive records, institutional defendants and laws that have changed significantly in recent years.
When considering an attorney, ask about their experience with sexual abuse and assault cases, including claims involving schools, churches, healthcare providers, youth facilities and other institutions. You may also want to know who will handle your case day to day, how often you can expect updates and how fees and costs are structured.
Just as important, you should feel comfortable asking questions and setting boundaries. The right attorney should explain your options clearly, respect your privacy and give you the information you need to decide how you want to proceed.
Many attorneys who handle sexual abuse cases work on a contingency-fee basis, meaning attorney fees are generally paid only if compensation is recovered. Before you agree to representation, the attorney should explain the fee percentage, case-related costs and whether you could be responsible for any expenses if the case does not succeed.
You should also ask how your privacy will be protected. An attorney can explain what communications are confidential, what information may need to be disclosed during litigation and whether steps may be available to limit public disclosure of sensitive information.
Oregon changed its civil filing laws in 2025. Under House Bill 3582, qualifying claims involving child sexual abuse or adult sexual assault arising under the amended law may generally be filed at any time beginning June 26, 2025.
Older claims are more complicated because the law did not automatically revive every claim that had already expired. Earlier filing rules may still apply depending on when the abuse occurred and the survivor’s age.
Potentially, yes. A civil sexual abuse lawsuit is separate from a criminal prosecution. A survivor may be able to pursue a civil claim even if the alleged perpetrator was never arrested, charged or convicted.
Civil cases also use a different standard of proof than criminal cases.
Possibly. Courts may allow survivors in some sexual abuse cases to use a pseudonym such as Jane Doe or John Doe, but anonymity is not automatic.
Whether you can proceed anonymously depends on the court, the type of case and the circumstances involved.
Potentially. Depending on the facts, a school, church, healthcare provider, youth organization, employer, residential facility or other institution may share responsibility.
Claims may involve negligent hiring or supervision, failure to act on complaints or warning signs, or other conduct that allegedly allowed abuse to occur.
However, the law that applies may depend on when the abuse occurred and whether an older claim had already expired. Survivors should not assume that a decades-old claim is either automatically barred or automatically revived without having the circumstances reviewed.
You may. Potential claims could involve a foster parent, private agency, residential facility, the Oregon Department of Human Services or others responsible for a child’s placement and safety.
Claims involving government agencies can carry additional procedural requirements and deadlines, so they should be evaluated promptly.
Civil cases also use a different standard of proof than criminal prosecutions. Depending on the claim, a civil lawsuit may seek compensation from the alleged perpetrator, an institution that may share responsibility, or both.
There is no standard timeline. Some cases resolve through settlement relatively early, while others can take longer because of investigation, discovery, motions, mediation or trial.
The timeline can also depend on how old the allegations are, how many defendants are involved and whether an institution is named.
Speaking with an attorney does not require you to file a lawsuit. You can ask questions, learn about filing deadlines and understand your options before deciding whether you want to move forward.
Many civil cases also resolve without a trial, although no particular outcome can be guaranteed. A survivor-focused attorney should explain the possible paths a case could take and allow you to make informed decisions about how you want to proceed.