Yes — and it runs alongside a criminal case, not instead of it
A civil lawsuit against an employee who stole money is separate from any criminal prosecution, and the two can proceed at the same time. The usual claims are conversion (civil theft of specific property or funds), unjust enrichment, and breach of fiduciary duty if the person held a position of trust over money or accounts. None of these require a criminal conviction first — a civil case runs on its own timeline with its own, lower burden of proof.
That lower burden is the real advantage of the civil path. Criminal cases require proof beyond a reasonable doubt; a civil claim only needs a preponderance of the evidence — more likely than not. Evidence that wouldn't support a criminal conviction can still win a civil judgment.
The part law-firm pages leave out: collectability
Winning a judgment means a court has ordered the person to pay you. It doesn't mean they have the money, and a judgment against someone with no assets and no steady income is a piece of paper, not a payment. You can garnish wages in most states (with limits on how much and some state-specific restrictions), place a lien on real property they own, or pursue their bank accounts — but none of that works against someone who owns nothing and works off the books. Before filing, it's worth honestly estimating whether this person actually has anything to collect against.
Before you file
Judgment ≠ payment
A civil judgment gives you the legal right to collect. Whether you actually get paid depends entirely on what the person owns — worth checking before spending the money on a lawsuit.
Restitution through the criminal case is often the better bet
If the case is prosecuted, a court can order restitution as part of sentencing, and that order carries enforcement mechanisms — probation conditions, wage garnishment tied to a criminal case — that a private civil judgment doesn't automatically have. It's also free to you beyond the time cost of cooperating with the prosecutor, versus a civil suit's attorney fees and court costs. The tradeoff is that you don't control the prosecutor's priorities or timeline, and plenty of smaller-dollar cases simply don't get charged. See how to report payroll fraud for the actual reporting sequence and the practical odds of a referral being pursued.
What decides whether it's worth it
- Documentation quality. Bank records, audit logs, and a paper trail connecting the person to the money win civil cases. A hunch without records is an expensive lawsuit to lose.
- The person's actual assets. Covered above, and worth real diligence before filing, not after.
- The dollar amount versus legal cost. Attorney fees on a contested civil suit can rival a modest theft amount; small claims court (with its own dollar caps, which vary by state) is sometimes the more proportionate venue for a smaller loss.
- Whether you also want them fired.If the person still works for you, the termination has its own sequence and its own traps — see can you fire an employee for stealing, including why suspending with pay while you sort out the civil and criminal paths is usually smarter than firing on the spot.
Talk to an employment or civil litigation attorney first
This isn't legal advice, and the collectability question specifically is one an attorney can help you assess before you spend money pursuing a judgment that may not pay out. If insurance is in the picture, employee dishonesty coverage may reimburse the loss directly without you needing to sue anyone — see what that coverage actually pays for before deciding litigation is the only path to getting the money back.