California Bill SB 131 Extends Ability for Some Victims to Sue Private Entities for Child Abuse

This bill passed the California Senate on September 6, 2013. See the text http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billAnalysisClient.xhtml

It is a very narrow amendment because it allows only one subset of victims one extra year to file lawsuits. Specifically it allows people abused by workers at nonprofit organizations and churches in the past  to have one more year to file a lawsuit, but it does NOT give any extra time to those abused at public institutions prior to 2008.

This nuance is not expressly described in the text. One has to look at the bill’s analyses to understand that victims of child sexual abuse prior to 2008 only had 6 months to sue when abused at a California public institution.The bill’s analyses can be found at this link. The August 20th analysis describes how this relates to other child abuse tort laws: “The CA Council of Nonprofit Organizations (which has no website, and whose letterhead does not reference its membership, but according to its lobbyists represents churches and private schools) bases much of its opposition on the contention this bill unfairly targets private entities. As noted in the Assembly Judiciary analysis, this argument stems from the Government Tort Claims Act (GTCA), which generally governs damage claims brought against public entities. The GTCA requires that a claim relating to a cause of action for death or injury be presented in writing to the public entity no later than six months after the date upon which the cause of action would be deemed to have accrued within the meaning of the applicable statute of limitations. In Shirk v. Vista Unified School District (2007) 42 Cal.4th 201, the California Supreme Court held that, notwithstanding the childhood sexual abuse statute of limitations timeframes in CCP Section 340.1 and its delayed discovery provisions, an abuse victim must follow the six-month presentation rule in the GTCA and cannot, without having done so, take advantage of the delayed-discovery rule otherwise applicable to sexual abuse victims.
In 2008, however, the Legislature waived, for child sexual abuse victims, the six-month notice of claim limitation requirement that applies to all other tort claims (SB 640, Simitian, Statutes of 2008) providing victims the same time to file a claim against public entities as against private institutions. SB 640 is prospective only; it does not revive claims that had been barred by the GTCA prior to its passage. Thus, the effect of this bill is to revive old claims against private institutions, but since such claims are barred against public institutions unless they are in compliance with the GTCA, it would not revive old claims against public institutions.”

Media

“The Senate approved a measure Friday that would make it easier for some child abuse victims to sue private or nonprofit employers for failing to protect them from molesters.

The bill, which is opposed by the Catholic Church, squeaked by on a 21-8 vote and now heads to the governor. The bill would allow some child abuse victims more time to file lawsuits against private institutions such as parochial schools, but would not apply to public schools. Some victims for whom the statute of limitations has expired would get a new one-year window during which they could bring a lawsuit.

Sen. Ricardo Lara (D-Bell Gardens) disclosed during the floor debate that he was a victim of child abuse by a family member. He said the legislation is needed because it sometimes takes decades for people to admit they were molested.

“I was alone trying to understand what happened to me for many years,” Lara said. “I couldn’t go to anyone.”

But some lawmakers objected that the bill applies to private schools but not public schools and would not provide for more criminal penalties.

“I want to see a bill that applies to both public and private [school] victims,” said Sen. Lou Correa (D-Santa Ana). “This bill should be about protecting and bringing restitution to all victims, not just one set versus another.”

Sen. Marty Block (D-San Diego) reacted angrily to those who said the bill was too narrowly written.

“It gives more protections to some victims of molestation,” Block said on the floor. “How can you possibly oppose that?”

Sen. James Beall Jr. (D-San Jose) authored SB 131.”

Bill expanding child abuse victims’ rights to sue heads to governor

[Los Angeles Times 9/6/13 by Patrick McGreevey]

REFORM Puzzle Piece

Why not expand it to all victims or remove the statute of limitations like 6 other states have done? Why only care about a subset of the victims?