BRANSON (MO)
Baptist News Global [Jacksonville FL]
March 6, 2026
By Mallory Challis
The Yandell v. Kanakuk lawsuit will proceed after requests for the case to be transferred to the Missouri Supreme Court, despite dismissal at the appellate level. The case was brought by former Kanakuk camper Logan Yandell in 2022 against Kanakuk Ministries and other related entities, who Yandell alleges engaged in fraudulent behavior.
Yandell claims members of Kanakuk leadership knew about extensive and pervasive sexual abuse committed by serial child sex abuser Pete Newman, who victimized Yandell and numerous other campers, but intentionally failed to make this knowledge known to survivors and their parents.
Yandell’s lawsuit, along with others that have come against the camp in recent years, alleges this information was left out of conversations to induce a settlement agreement with his family and avoid bringing the matter to trial, making the agreement fraudulent.
The original lawsuit was dismissed last January after Christian County Judge Raymond M. Gross ruled the claims had exceeded the statute of limitations for fraud in Missouri. However, the case proceeded in the appellate court, where Yandell argued his complaint remains within the statute of limitations.
This argument was sparked when attorneys representing Kanakuk Ministries argued that, because information about Pete Newman’s criminal trial was publicly available as early as 2009, the Yandell family should have known about the full nature of Newman’s abuse.
During Newman’s trial, Yandell was still a minor and his family lived in a different state. His parents claim they never saw any public coverage of the trial, most of which was local to Missouri-based newspapers. They did not seek out further information about the matter after being assured by Kanakuk CEO and close family friend Joe White that before Yandell’s abuse disclosure, “nothing has ever been on our radar with Pete.”
Had the family known what they know now, they may not have settled.
Yandell’s attorneys said the family did not know the full extent of Newman’s abuse until Nancy French began her investigative journalism on the matter in 2021.
Yandell’s attorneys said the family did not know the full extent of Newman’s abuse until Nancy French began her investigative journalism on the matter in 2021.
Later in 2023, the family discovered a letter informing parents and families of Kanakuk campers about the abuse was drafted in 2010 but never sent out after ACE American Insurance Co. threatened to deny coverage to Kanakuk Ministries if they did.
According to the lawsuit, the existence of this 2010 draft letter “may be the only known instance in which the Kanakuk defendants admit having prior knowledge of inappropriate conduct by Newman.”
Despite these arguments, the Missouri Court of Appeals also has dismissed the lawsuit. However, Yandell is determined to continue litigation in the Missouri Supreme Court.
The application for venue transfer explains the issue at hand in determining fraud is whether Yandell, undergoing reasonable diligence by seeking out information regarding the matter, should have discovered this information on his own.
The matter now is not whether the fraudulent actions occurred (Kanakuk denies them), but “whether the public availability of information automatically starts the statute of limitations for fraud or whether a fact question exists regarding whether such information should be discovered through reasonable diligence where direct misrepresentations were made and relied upon.”
The appellate court ruled Yandell and his family should have been exposed to this information by as late as 2011. With a 10-year maximum limitation for filing fraud cases, Yandell would have had to file his lawsuit by 2021.
However, 2021 is the year the Yandell claims to have first become privy to the information. His attorneys say this should be the starting point for determining the claim’s statute of limitations, not 2011.
This is because, they say, it is completely reasonable for parties to rely on settlements and the representations other parties make regarding them during or leading up to legal proceedings.
Likewise, it is not reasonable for any party who settles a claim to be required to search “every media report involving the other party to the settlement to determine if there was any information indicating that the other part committed fraud, even where they directly inquire as to such information from a party’s representative,” as the Yandell family did with Joe White. “That would not be reasonable diligence, that would be obsession.”
Related articles:
Litigation in Yandell v. Kanakuk proceeds in court of appeals
Judge dismisses Yandell v. Kanakuk claims, but litigation may proceed
Judge to decide if Yandell v. Kanakuk suit is within statute of limitations
Yandell v. Kanakuk lawsuit amended to include civil conspiracy claims
Motions to dismiss conspiracy charges in Yandell v. Kanakuk denied
Kanakuk sex abuser Pete Newman denied parole