Secret settlements in sex abuse cases: what California law no longer allows.

For decades, the standard ending to a sexual abuse case was a settlement with a sweeping confidentiality clause. The survivor was paid — and silenced. The abuser and the institutions that protected him moved on, free to repeat the pattern with the next victim. California has largely closed that door. If you are settling a sexual abuse claim here, you should know what a defendant can and cannot demand of you.

The facts of the abuse cannot be gagged

Code of Civil Procedure section 1002 prohibits settlement provisions that prevent disclosure of factual information in civil cases involving conduct that could be prosecuted as a felony sex offense, childhood sexual abuse, or sexual exploitation — as well as sexual assault against elders and dependent adults. A settlement term purporting to silence a survivor about those facts is unenforceable, and a court cannot enter an order sealing that information from the public.

The STAND Act (SB 820), passed in the wake of #MeToo, extended the same rule to settlements of civil claims for sexual assault, sexual harassment, and sex-based harassment or discrimination in the workplace or housing. And the Silenced No More Act (SB 331) broadened the protection again, reaching settlements of all harassment, discrimination, and retaliation claims under California's Fair Employment and Housing Act — not just those based on sex.

What can stay confidential

Two important carve-outs run in the survivor's favor, not the defendant's. First, the settlement amount may be kept confidential — that remains a legitimate term. Second, the survivor's own identity can be shielded: at the claimant's request, a settlement may include provisions protecting their name and identifying facts from disclosure. Confidentiality remains available as the survivor's shield; the law simply forbids its use as the defendant's sword.

Why this matters at the negotiating table

Defendants historically paid a premium for silence. Under current law, they cannot buy silence about the underlying conduct, which changes the negotiation. A survivor no longer has to choose between fair compensation and the right to tell their own story, warn others, or cooperate with investigators. And a defense lawyer who inserts an unlawful gag provision risks having it voided — while the rest of the agreement stands.

That said, these statutes have boundaries and exceptions, and how they apply depends on the claims pleaded and when the agreement was signed. This is a place where precise drafting matters.

The bottom line

California's policy is now explicit: secrecy that enables serial abuse is not a term money can buy. Survivors keep control over their own privacy and their own story.

If you have been asked to sign a settlement or severance agreement containing a confidentiality clause — or are weighing a claim and worried about being silenced — I would be glad to review it with you in a confidential consultation.

---

Yisrael Gelb · Gelb Law APC | Beverly Hills, CA · yisrael@gelblawapc.com · (323) 632-6864

Start an intake Read the FAQ