Keep Factually independent
Whether you agree or disagree with our analysis, these conversations matter for democracy. We don't take money from political groups - even a $5 donation helps us keep it that way.
What settlements or jury verdicts have arisen from lawsuits alleging sexual misconduct by Trump?
Executive summary
Civil litigation tied to allegations of sexual misconduct by Donald Trump has produced at least one major jury verdict — an $83.3 million damages award (part of $88.3 million across two related E. Jean Carroll cases) — and a history of other suits, some settled or withdrawn, reported across public timelines (see totals of $88.3 million and the January 26, 2024 $83.3M figure) [1] [2]. Available sources catalog many allegations and legal actions (some settled, some dropped) but do not provide a single exhaustive list of every settlement amount or jury verdict beyond the Carroll reporting [2] [1] [3].
1. E. Jean Carroll: the headline jury verdicts and damages
The most concrete court outcomes in current reporting concern author E. Jean Carroll, whose two related lawsuits against Trump led to jury findings and damages totalling $88.3 million; one media account highlights a January 26, 2024 order that Trump pay an additional $83.3 million in damages [1] [2]. Wikipedia’s summary of the Carroll litigation states the two suits together produced $88.3 million in awards and notes both cases were under appeal at the time of that reporting [1].
2. Other named suits: settlements, withdrawals and disputes
Reporting and timelines point to several other legal actions alleging sexual misconduct that ended without a high-profile jury award: Ivana Trump’s 1990 divorce deposition included a “rape” allegation that was later softened amid settlement; businesswoman Jill Harth brought a 1997 suit alleging breach of contract and sexual harassment that was later dropped or settled; former Apprentice contestant Summer Zervos pursued defamation litigation after Trump called her a liar and later withdrew that case in 2021 [2]. These items are described in summary sources and timelines but precise settlement figures and full judicial dispositions are not provided in those summaries [2].
3. Broad timelines and catalogues of allegations — what they show and don’t
Long-form timelines compiled by outlets such as The Guardian and other chronologies document many allegations spanning decades and sometimes note related legal steps (lawsuits filed, withdrawals, settlements, depositions), but these timelines function as aggregations of claims and litigation rather than court dockets listing every monetary settlement or verdict [3]. The 2019–2024 era brought renewed legal activity and litigation strategy focused on evidence of patterns of behavior; sources cite the Carroll case as using broader corroborating evidence such as contemporaneous accounts and the Access Hollywood tape in court filings [1].
4. Fact-checking and skeptical coverage about alleged secret settlements
Fact-checking reporting has pushed back on viral claims and memos that list many secret settlements or alleged multimillion-dollar resolutions in numerous child sex–related claims; Snopes and similar work caution that some viral lists are unproven or lack documentary court records, noting gaps or implausibilities in timelines and attorney involvement [4]. FactCheck.org coverage and other fact checks also treat aggregate monetary figures linked to sexual-misconduct settlements in public institutions with care, underscoring the need to separate documented judicial awards from disputed or undocumented settlement claims [5].
5. Limits of the available reporting and what is “not found”
Available sources in this search do not present a definitive, court-verified roster of every settlement payment or jury verdict tied to every allegation against Trump; instead, they spotlight a handful of litigated matters (notably E. Jean Carroll) and describe many allegations that resulted in settlements, withdrawals or no public resolution [2] [1] [3]. If you are seeking a complete list of every settlement amount, court judgment, or confidential agreement, that is not provided in the cited summaries and timelines [2] [1] [3].
6. Competing perspectives and implicit agendas in coverage
News timelines and encyclopedic summaries clearly identify divergent perspectives: the plaintiffs’ accounts and jury findings in Carroll’s cases versus Trump’s denials and assertions that allegations are politically motivated. Outlets compiling timelines (The Guardian) or encyclopedic summaries (Wikipedia) synthesize many claims; fact-checkers (Snopes, FactCheck.org) emphasize verification and caution about unverifiable viral claims — each plays a different role from aggregation to verification, reflecting editorial priorities and the public interest in both documenting allegations and guarding against unproven assertions [3] [4] [5].
7. How to follow up for court-level certainty
For judicially verified details beyond the Carroll awards, consult primary court records (docket entries, judgments) or contemporary reporting that cites those filings; the summary sources here point you to the major named matters but do not substitute for case dockets or settlement agreements when those are confidential [1] [2]. Available summaries and timelines are useful for orientation but do not replace direct court documents for a comprehensive, legally authoritative accounting [1] [3].
Summary takeaway: The single most verifiable and widely reported jury outcome in the set of sources is the Carroll litigation ($88.3M total, including an $83.3M order noted Jan. 26, 2024), while many other allegations resulted in settlements, withdrawals, or remain documented as claims in timelines rather than as public, itemized verdicts [1] [2] [3].