Karey Clark Zimmerman

Sources

1. Zimmerman v. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints et al [case 2:25-cv-00206], PacerMonitor, February 10, 2025.

• 1. Zimmerman v. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints et al [case 2:25-cv-00206]

  • 10 Feb 2025
  • Court record
  • PacerMonitor

  • original
  • archived
  • back to list

  ANNE ANDREWS California Bar No. 103280
  aa@andrewsthornton.com
  ANDREWS & THORNTON 4701 Von Karman Ave, Ste. 300 Newport Beach, CA 92660 Telephone: (949) 748-1000 Facsimile: (949) 315-3540
  (Pro Hac Vice forthcoming)
  ALAN A. GREENBERG Nevada Bar No. 15922
  AGreenberg@GGTrialLaw.com
  JEMMA E. DUNN Nevada Bar No. 16229
  JDunn@GGTrialLaw.com
  GREENBERG GROSS LLP
  1980 Festival Plaza Drive, Suite 730 Las Vegas, Nevada 89135 Telephone: (702) 777-0888 Facsimile: (702) 777-0801
  Attorneys for [Plaintiff] Zimmerman
  Case 2:25-cv-00206-CDS-MDC
  Document 4
  Filed 01/31/25
  Page 1 of 12
  UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEVADA
  [Plaintiff] Zimmerman, Plaintiff,
  v.
  THE CHURCH OF JESUS CHRIST OF LATTER-DAY SAINTS (a corporation), KAREY ZIMMERMAN (an individual), and DOES 1-500, Inclusive,
  Defendants.
  Case No. 2:25-cv-00206-CDS-MDC
  AMENDED COMPLAINT (DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL)
  1. Illegally Transporting a Minor for Sex 18 U.S.C. § 2423 (a) (Against All DEFENDANTS)
  2. Sexual Abuse of a Minor (Against KAREY)
  3. Negligence (Against L.D.S.)
  Plaintiff [Plaintiff] Zimmerman by and through her attorneys, Greenberg Gross LLP, bring this action against Defendants THE CHURCH OF JESUS CHRIST OF LATTER-DAY SAINTS (a corporation), KAREY ZIMMERMAN (an individual) and DOES 1-500.
  Case No.
  AMENDED COMPLAINT AND JURY DEMAND

  I. PRELIMINARY STATEMENT
  Case 2:25-cv-00206-CDS-MDC Document 4 Filed 01/31/25 Page 2 of 12
  1.
  (“L.D.S.”) had actual notice that Defendant KAREY ZIMMERMAN (“KAREY”) was sexually abusing his daughter, Plaintiff [Plaintiff] Zimmerman (“PLAINTIFF”). Despite this knowledge, L.D.S. did nothing to prevent further abuse from occurring.
  II. JURISDICTION AND VENUE
  Defendant THE CHURCH OF JESUS CHRIST OF LATTER-DAY SAINTS
  2.
  pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 2255 and 28 U.S.C. § 1331.
  This Court properly has subject matter jurisdiction to hear civil claims brought
  3. Venue in this Court is proper pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1391 in that a substantial part of the events or omissions giving rise to the claims asserted herein occurred in this District, and Defendants are subject to personal jurisdiction in this District.
  4. State law claims two and three are timely brought pursuant to the Nevada Revised Statutes § 11.215. Claims two and three allege physical, psychological, and emotional injuries and damages suffered as a result of sexual abuse or sexual exploitation of PLAINTIFF when she was under the age of 18. PLAINTIFF can bring an action against the perpetrator of her abuse at any time and has until the age of thirty-eight years old to bring an action against any other defendant that is liable for the injuries she suffered. As such, PLAINTIFF’s complaint is timely.
  5. This Court has supplemental jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1367(a) over the state law claims, including the claim for punitive damages, as these claims are so related to the federal claims in this action that they form part of the same case or controversy under Article III of the United States Constitution. Specifically, the state law claims arise from the same transaction and rely on identical facts for their resolution as the federal claims.

  -2-
  AMENDED COMPLAINT AND JURY DEMAND

  Case 2:25-cv-00206-CDS-MDC
  Document 4 Filed 01/31/25 Page 3 of 12
  1
  2
  3 A. 4
  5 adoptive father of PLAINTIFF.
  6 7. KAREY and his wife, [MZ] (“[MZ]”) adopted
  7 PLAINTIFF when she was seven years old. Upon information and belief, KAREY adopted
  8 PLAINTIFF with the goal of grooming and sexually abusing her. KAREY knew that his wife
  9 could not have children, and decided to adopt PLAINTIFF so he could groom, sexually abuse, and
  10 manipulate PLAINTIFF into being in an intimate relationship.
  11 8. After sexually abusing PLAINTIFF when she was around the ages of seven to nine,
  12 PLAINTIFF reported the abuse to [MZ] who then reported the ongoing sexual abuse to the
  13 presiding bishop within the Utah Ward that PLAINTIFF’s family attended. However, the bishop
  14 and the ward did nothing to protect PLAINTIFF or report to law enforcement the sexual abuse that
  15 had occurred.
  16 9. Upon information and belief, KAREY moved to Nevada so that he could transport
  17 PLAINTIFF to a new location where the L.D.S. congregation would not know about the sexual
  18 abuse he perpetrated on his daughter. Upon information and belief, KAREY transported
  19 PLAINTIFF to Nevada with the goal of grooming her for unlawful sexual activities and the aim of
  20 impregnating PLAINTIFF when she was old enough to conceive children.
  21 B. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints
  III. DEFENDANT PARTIES
  Perpetrator Defendant KAREY ZIMMERMAN
  6. Defendant KAREY ZIMMERMAN is an individual member of L.D.S. and the
  22
  23 State of Utah, with its principal place of business at 50 East North Temple, Floor 20, Salt Lake
  24 City, State of Utah 84150. L.D.S. operates churches, meeting houses, wards, and stakes within
  25 Nevada. The presiding bishops and stake presidents in Nevada act under the supervision and
  26 control of L.D.S. L.D.S financially benefits from its activity in Nevada by collecting tithes and
  27 donations from it. This Court has jurisdiction over L.D.S. as a result of the sexual abuse of
  28 Plaintiff in Nevada, the illegal transportation of Plaintiff from Utah to Nevada for the purposes of
  -3-
  AMENDED COMPLAINT AND JURY DEMAND
  10. L.D.S. is a corporation duly organized and operating pursuant to the laws of the

  Case 2:25-cv-00206-CDS-MDC Document 4 Filed 01/31/25 Page 4 of 12
  1 unlawful sexual activities, and the resulting coverup. L.D.S. purposefully availed itself of the
  2 benefits of doing business in Nevada. L.D.S. enabled the abuse and illegal transportation of
  3 PLAINTIFF and aided in concealing the abuse from law enforcement. L.D.S. benefited from this
  4 coverup by protecting its reputation and ensuring a steady flow of tithes and donations from its
  5 members.
  6 11. At all times relevant to the allegations listed herein, Plaintiff was a member of
  7 L.D.S. in different wards located in Utah and Nevada.
  8 C. Doe Defendants 1-500
  9
  10 Defendants DOES 1 through 500, inclusive, are unknown to Plaintiffs who are therefore ignorant
  11 of the true names and sue said Defendants by such fictitious names. Plaintiffs believe and allege
  12 that each of the Defendants designated herein by fictitious names is in some manner legally
  13 responsible for the events and happenings herein referred to and caused damages proximately and
  14 foreseeably to Plaintiffs as alleged herein. The true names, whether corporate, individual or
  15 otherwise, of Defendants 1 through 500, inclusive, are presently unknown to Plaintiff, which
  16 therefore sues said Defendants by such fictitious names, and will seek leave to amend this
  17 Complaint to show their true names and capacities when same have been ascertained.
  18 13. At all times hereinafter alleged, “DEFENDANTS” or “All DEFENDANTS”
  19 include all herein named Defendants as well as Defendants DOES 1 through 500, inclusive.
  20 14. At all times herein alleged, each of the DEFENDANTS was the agent, servant,
  21 partner, aider and abettor, co-conspirator and joint venturer of each of the remaining
  22 DEFENDANTS herein and was at all times operating and acting within the course, purpose and
  23 scope of said agency, service, employment, partnership, conspiracy and joint venture and rendered
  24 substantial assistance and encouragement to the other DEFENDANTS, knowing that their conduct
  25 constituted a breach of duty owed to Plaintiffs and unlawful harm to Plaintiffs.

  -4-
  AMENDED COMPLAINT AND JURY DEMAND
  12. The true names or capacities, whether individual, corporate, or otherwise, of

  IV. PLAINTIFF PARTIES
  Case 2:25-cv-00206-CDS-MDC
  Document 4 Filed 01/31/25 Page 5 of 12
  15.
  resident of Nevada and Utah. At the time of filing this complaint, PLAINTIFF is a resident of Utah.
  PLAINTIFF was at all relevant times to the tortious conduct herein mentioned a
  A.
  V.
  FACTUAL BACKGROUND
  L.D.S.’s Negligence Failed to Prevent [Plaintiff] Zimmerman from Being Sexually
  Assaulted by Her Father
  16. PLAINTIFF, and her parents KAREY AND [MZ] (collectively known as “PARENTS”) were long-standing members of L.D.S. who paid tithes and regularly attended L.D.S.-sponsored events.
  17. When PLAINTIFF was seven years old, her biological parents struggled with drug addiction and were not able to support her. PLAINTIFF was subsequently adopted by PARENTS. Upon information and belief, PLAINTIFF’s adoption was handled through an affiliated entity of L.D.S. called L.D.S. Family Services. At the time of the adoption, PLAINTIFF and PARENTS were living in South Jordan, Utah.
  18. Shortly after being adopted, KAREY started sexually abusing PLAINTIFF at their home. The abuse involved fondling and violent penetration while PLAINTIFF was around the ages of seven and eight years old. The sexual abuse occurred in PLAINTIFF’s room and was so traumatic that PLAINTIFF needed to disassociate during the experience.
  19. Shortly before PLAINTIFF turned nine years old, and after at least three incidents of abuse, PLAINTIFF told [MZ] that KAREY was sexually abusing her. [MZ] informed the presiding bishop of the ward they attended about the sexual abuse that she learned about. As a result of [MZ] reporting the abuse, KAREY was forced to stop taking sacraments and participating in religious ceremonies., L.D.S. did not report the abuse to law enforcement and took no steps to stop the abuse from further occurring. L.D.S. clergy members, at ///
  -5-
  AMENDED COMPLAINT AND JURY DEMAND

  Case 2:25-cv-00206-CDS-MDC Document 4 Filed 01/31/25 Page 6 of 12
  1 all relevant times, were mandatory reporters under Utah law and were compelled by law to report
  2 the abuse to the proper authorities.
  3 20. If L.D.S. and its local leaders had properly reported the fact that KAREY was
  4 sexually abusing PLAINTIFF, then PLAINTIFF could have been spared from having to endure
  5 later incidents of abuse.
  6 21. When PLAINTIFF was around eleven years old, PARENTS moved their family
  7 from Utah to Las Vegas, Nevada. PLAINTIFF began attending L.D.S. services at one of the wards
  8 in Las Vegas, along with both of her parents. Despite having knowledge of KAREY’s propensity
  9 to abuse minors, L.D.S. did not take any steps to prevent KAREY from continuing to abuse
  10 PLAINTIFF after PARENTS moved to Nevada. Upon information and belief, L.D.S. did not
  11 report KAREY’s propensity to abuse minors to local congregation leaders in Las Vegas, despite
  12 knowing that KAREY still had PLAINTIFF in his care and would be around young children while
  13 attending church services.
  14 22. When PLAINTIFF was around fifteen years old, PARENTS moved their family
  15 from Las Vegas to Anthem, Nevada. After PARENTS moved to Anthem, KAREY began sexually
  16 assaulting PLAINTIFF again. After turning fifteen, PLAINTIFF was assaulted at least five to ten
  17 times involving violent and traumatic penetration and fondling.
  18 23. KAREY manipulated PLAINTIFF into not reporting the abuse again by informing
  19 her that the reason he was raping her was because of the lack of intimacy he had with [MZ].
  20 KAREY tried to convince PLAINTIFF that the abuse was necessary to keep their family together
  21 and to prevent him from having extramarital affairs with other women.
  22 24. Upon information and belief, KAREY’s motivation for sexually abusing
  23 PLAINTIFF was to impregnate her. KAREY’s motivation was fueled by the fact that [MZ]
  24 was unable to conceive her own children, and KAREY was forced to adopt children. Upon
  25 information and belief, KAREY’s motivation for moving to Nevada was to move to a ward where
  26 the congregants and Bishop were not aware of the abuse he perpetrated on PLAINTIFF, and where
  27 he could continue to groom PLAINTIFF until she was old enough to conceive children.
  28 ///
  -6-
  AMENDED COMPLAINT AND JURY DEMAND

  VI.
  PUNITIVE DAMAGES ALLEGATIONS
  PLAINTIFF repeats and re-allege the allegations set forth in the above paragraphs.
  Case 2:25-cv-00206-CDS-MDC Document 4 Filed 01/31/25 Page 7 of 12
  26.
  abusing PLAINTIFF. Despite this knowledge, L.D.S. took no steps to protect PLAINTIFF and other child congregates, who L.D.S. knew were vulnerable to KAREY’s abuse.
  27. Despite the reports of KAREY’s predatory behavior, L.D.S. did not investigate or report the allegations to the proper authorities, instead making surface levels attempts at punishing KAREY by preventing him from taking sacraments.
  28. Despite knowing that KAREY posed a threat to his own family and other children outside his family, L.D.S. did not take the proper steps to ensure the protection of their minor congregates when KAREY decided to move his family to Nevada.
  29. Such conduct is willful, wanton and reckless, justifying an award of punitive damages in an amount to be proven at trial.
  VII.
  FIRST CLAIM FOR RELIEF ILLEGALLY TRANSPORTING A MINOR FOR SEX IN VIOLATION OF 18 U.S.C. § 2423(a)
  (Against All Defendants)
  At all times herein, L.D.S. knew that KAREY was a child predator that was
  30.
  Complaint as though set forth in full in this cause of action.
  PLAINTIFF incorporates by reference each and every prior paragraph of this
  31. An individual who, while a minor under the age of 18 years old, was a victim of a violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2423, and suffered personal injury as a result, may bring a civil action for damages and reasonable attorney’s fees against the person who transported them or conspired to transport them under 18 U.S.C. § 2255.
  32. A person is in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2423 (a) if they knowingly transport an individual, attempt to transport an individual, or conspire to transport an individual, “who has not attained the age of 16 years in interstate or foreign commerce, or in any commonwealth territory
  -7-
  AMENDED COMPLAINT AND JURY DEMAND

  or possession of the United States with intent that the individual engages in prostitution, or in any sexual activity for which any person can be charged with a criminal offense”
  33. While PLAINTIFF was a minor under the age of 16, KAREY transported PLAINTIFF from Utah to Nevada with the intent of grooming and sexually assaulting PLAINTIFF.
  34. For any of the above acts, KAREY could and should have been criminally charged for sexual abuse of a minor.
  35. L.D.S. conspired with KAREY by failing to report KAREY to the proper authorities and by allowing KAREY to join a new ward in Nevada, after he had been exposed as a child predator in Utah.
  36. L.D.S. and KAREY are liable pursuant to § 2423 and PLAINTIFF is entitled to bring this civil action pursuant to § 2255(a).
  Case 2:25-cv-00206-CDS-MDC Document 4 Filed 01/31/25 Page 8 of 12
  10
  11
  12
  13 37. As a direct result of the transporting and conspiring, PLAINTIFF suffered severe
  physical and emotional harm. As a direct and proximate cause of transporting PLAINTIFF, PLAINTIFF was left in the care of a known abuser, KAREY. As a result, KAREY repeatedly abused and raped PLAINTIFF.
  SECOND CLAIM FOR RELIEF
  SEXUAL ABUSE OF A MINOR
  (Against KAREY and Does 1-500)
  38. PLAINTIFF incorporates by reference each and every prior paragraph of this
  Complaint as though set forth in full in this cause of action.

  of abuse. KAREY took advantage of this to repeatedly sexually abuse PLAINTIFF, abuse that
  25
  included penetration and fondling. PLAINTIFF did not consent to the acts, nor could PLAINTIFF
  26
  have consented to the acts given her young age at the time of the abuse.
  27 28
  ///
  39. While PLAINTIFF was a member of the L.D.S. community and reliant upon L.D.S., KAREY took advantage of the protection L.D.S. was providing him by concealing reports
  -8-
  AMENDED COMPLAINT AND JURY DEMAND

  40. As a direct and legal result of the sexual abuse by KAREY, PLAINTIFF experienced physical, emotional, and psychological injuries for which she is entitled to monetary damages and other relief.
  THIRD CLAIM FOR RELIEF NEGLIGENCE (Against L.D.S. and DOES 1-500)
  Case 2:25-cv-00206-CDS-MDC Document 4 Filed 01/31/25 Page 9 of 12
  41.
  fully set forth and brought in this cause of action.
  PLAINTIFF incorporates by reference each and every prior allegation as though
  42. DEFENDANTS are persons or entities who owed a duty of care to the PLAINTIFF.
  43. As mandated reporters of child abuse, L.D.S. clergy had a special relationship with minor congregates and owed a statutory duty to protect PLAINTIFF from reasonably foreseeable harm. As stated above, L.D.S. failed in this duty when they failed to communicate reports of sexual abuse to the proper law enforcement while PLAINTIFF was being abused by KAREY in Utah.
  44. Despite receiving reports of KAREY sexually abusing PLAINTIFF, L.D.S. took no steps to report the abuse to law enforcement or stop the abuse from continuing. Instead, L.D.S. concluded the abuse and conspired to allow KAREY to transport PLAINTIFF to Nevada, where he could more freely continue abusing PLAINTIFF.
  45. It was reasonably foreseeable the fact that KAREY was sexually abusing PLAINTIFF that the abuse would continue. By allowing KAREY to transport PLAINTIFF to Nevada, it was reasonably foreseeable that KAREY would continue to abuse PLAINTIFF while outside of the purview of a ward that had actual notice of his predatory behavior.
  46. PLAINTIFF experienced physical, emotional and psychological injuries for which she is entitled to monetary damages and other relief.

  -9-
  AMENDED COMPLAINT AND JURY DEMAND

  Case 2:25-cv-00206-CDS-MDC
  Document 4 Filed 01/31/25 Page 10 of 12

  VIII. PRAYER FOR RELIEF
  WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs pray for judgment as follows:
  As to the First Claim for Relief and all DEFENDANTS, damages to the PLAINTIFF according to proof including as applicable:
  1. Past and future medical and care expenses of PLAINTIFF;
  2. Other economic loss;
  3. Non-economic loss according to proof:
  (a) Compensation for physical pain and discomfort;
  (b) Compensation for fright, nervousness, anxiety, worry, and apprehension;
  4. Pre-judgment and post-judgment interest to the Plaintiff according to proof;
  5. Reasonable costs to the PLAINTIFF as provided by law;
  6. Attorney’s fees pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 2255;
  As to the Second Claim for Relief and to KAREY:
  1. Past and future medical and care expenses of PLAINTIFF;
  2. Other economic loss;
  3. Non-economic loss according to proof:
  (a) Compensation for physical pain and discomfort;
  (b) Compensation for fright, nervousness, anxiety, worry, and apprehension;
  4. Pre-judgment and post-judgment interest to the PLAINTIFF according to proof;
  5. Reasonable costs to the PLAINTIFF as provided by law;
  -10-
  AMENDED COMPLAINT AND JURY DEMAND

  Case 2:25-cv-00206-CDS-MDC Document 4 Filed 01/31/25 Page 11 of 12

  As to the Third Claim for Relief and to L.D.S., damages to the PLAINTIFF according to proof including as applicable:
  1. Past and future medical and care expenses of PLAINTIFF;
  2. Other economic loss;
  3. Non-economic loss according to proof:
  (a) Compensation for physical pain and discomfort;
  (b) Compensation for fright, nervousness, anxiety, worry, and apprehension;
  4. Pre-judgment and post-judgment interest to the PLAINTIFF according to proof;
  5. Reasonable costs to the PLAINTIFF as provided by law;
  As to the First Claim for Relief and all DEFENDANTS, by virtue of knowing and intentional violations of 18 U.S.C. § 2255, awarding to PLAINTIFF’s punitive damages. As to the Second Claim for Relief and KAREY, by virtue of wanton, malicious, willful, and/or cruel conduct, awarding PLAINTIFFS punitive damages.
  14 DATED: January 31, 2025 15

  GREENBERG GROSS LLP
  By:
  /s/ Jemma E. Dunn
  Alan A. Greenberg
  Nevada Bar No. 15922
  Jemma E. Dunn
  Nevada Bar No. 16229
  Attorneys for [Plaintiff] Zimmerman
  -11-
  AMENDED COMPLAINT AND JURY DEMAND

  JURY DEMAND
  PLAINTIFF hereby demands a jury trial of all the issues in the above-entitled matter.
  Case 2:25-cv-00206-CDS-MDC Document 4 Filed 01/31/25 Page 12 of 12
  DATED: January 31, 2025
  GREENBERG GROSS LLP
  By:
  /s/ Jemma E. Dunn
  Alan A. Greenberg
  Nevada Bar No. 15922
  Jemma E. Dunn
  Nevada Bar No. 16229
  Attorneys for [Plaintiff] Zimmerman
  -12-
  AMENDED COMPLAINT AND JURY DEMAND