California Federal Court

A Publicity Stunt Lawsuit

The Huntsman lawsuit is all fluff and no substance. The Church should move for dismissal.

Earlier this week, James Huntsman, son of the late billionaire Jon Huntsman, Sr. and brother of former Utah governor and U.S. presidential candidate Jon Huntsman, Jr., filed a federal lawsuit against The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (“the Church”) demanding the return of charitable contributions he has made over the course of his lifetime.

Specifically, Huntsman alleges he has paid in excess of $5 million in tithing and is seeking its return plus interest. Huntsman’s lawsuit also demands exemplary and punitive damages to “punish” and make “an example of” the Church.

Huntsman sets the tone for his lawsuit in the very first paragraph by including a bizarre quote about honesty from early Church leader Brigham Young. Throughout the complaint, Huntsman put his personal outrage and the most salacious details in a bold-italicized font so that anyone perusing the suit could quickly get a sense of the purported “fraud” and “greed.”

For 13 pages, Huntsman rambles on without specificity, without evidence, and without explaining how he personally was harmed—the cornerstone of any civil action. In legal terms, Huntsman failed to plead sufficient facts to state a claim for fraud and thus his complaint is deficient. The Court will have no choice but to dismiss the lawsuit. Huntsman’s clumsy and bumbling complaint signifies to me that he filed this suit merely as a publicity stunt without any sincere intent to recover his monies.

The Court will have no choice but to dismiss the lawsuit.

In 2019, I worked as outside counsel for The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints as an attorney with the firm Kirton McConkie. I worked on various legal matters for the Church, including sensitive litigation. While I will not divulge information about any specific cases, I can state with surety that requests such as tithing refunds are handled respectfully, sincerely, dutifully, and seriously until the matter is fully resolved.

In order to understand a tithing refund request, it is important to be familiar with how the law characterizes tithing. Tithing is classified as a “charitable contribution,” eligible for a federal tax deduction because the Church is a qualified nonprofit, religious group.

According to the Internal Revenue Service, “a charitable contribution is a donation or gift to … a qualified organization. It is voluntary and is made without getting, or expecting to get, anything of equal value.”

A charitable contribution is a gift, and, like any gift, under the law is an irrevocable transfer of a donor’s entire interest in the donated cash or property. Since the donor’s entire interest in the donated cash or property is transferred, it is generally impossible for the donor to recover the donated property.

James Huntsman knows his tithing donations were voluntary and fall under the legal definition of a gift. He knows the Church has no legal obligation to return his tithing. He knows that the return of his tithing has tax implications, and he would most likely have to file years of amended tax returns to remove any deduction claimed.

But most importantly, I believe Huntsman knows that if he had sincerely sent his tithing refund request to Church leadership, they would have absolutely worked with him toward a positive resolution. There is no plausible reason Huntsman needed to file a baseless, improperly pleaded claim in federal court other than in an attempt to embarrass the Church. The only person who should be embarrassed is James Huntsman.

About the author

Kate Taylor Lauck

Kate Taylor Lauck is an investigative attorney who specializes in child abuse. She holds a Master’s degree in National Security Strategies from the U.S. Naval War College and graduated cum laude from Georgetown Law in 2017.
On Key

You Might Also Like

A Latter-day Saint Defense of the Unborn

It has become popular for people of faith to seek a middle ground in the abortion debate of being “personally opposed” while according choice to others. This is why I think that position is problematic.

New BYU Studies!

BYU Studies is out with its newest edition. https://byustudies.byu.edu/journal/61-1/ The entry, titled “The Restored Gospel and Good Government” includes an article from Thomas B. Griffith, one of the judges who recently testified on behalf of Ketanji Brown Jackson. Dieter F.  Uchtdorf, and Dallin H. Oaks, also contribute. Important scholars such as Melissa Wei-Tsing Inouye, and Susan Madsen add to the conversation. Among the topics are the legacy of the late Senator Harry Reid. And across the board, the pieces are provocative additions to the important conversation we also engage in at Public Square. We recommend reading it. The Mormon Women for Ethical Government have stepped in as guest editors for the issue. MWEG has played a tremendous role in amplifying the voice of Latter-day Saints in public discourse. And their steady call for increased civility comes at an important time. But the organization has often failed to create those kinds of conversations within its own community, which has often been described as rancorous and uncivil towards anyone but those within the center-left politics of the organization. And the organization has also been criticized for representing itself as being more representative of Latter-day Saint women than it is in fact, an issue that their role as guest editors here may amplify. Latter-day Saint commentator Cassandra Hedelius writes, “I’m a Latter-day Saint woman, anti-Trump, and I love ethical government. But I disagree with them.” Perhaps the most noteworthy criticism of the organization and issue is that MWEG sees itself as a neutral voice for political civility, and yet its positions are often explicitly left-wing. Ivan Wolfe, a rhetoric instructor at Arizona State University has said, “While on the surface this is fine, the links in the footnotes indicate a pretty solid and unwavering support for progressive, Democrat (capital D partisan) changes.” For example, the solutions posited for increased civility in this issue include reparations, praise for the Chinese communist school system,  and changes to voter laws entirely in line with proposals from the Democratic party. When viewed as a thoughtful, but largely partisan, call for increased civility from a non-representative group of Latter-day Saint women, the issue is a resounding success.

Conviction is No Sin

The sin of certainty? It’s become popular to argue that a passionate conviction about God can be dangerous. But this overlooks the deep humility we can cultivate in a vibrant faith.