Legal Question in Personal Injury in California

Re: Child Molestation

Not sure about the statue. Sorry

Re: Child Molestation

Because of the Catholic Church's problems, a short term statute of limitations has been opened up that may be available to you. The church should certainly be named, etc. If you just sue this person, he will likely have nothing and you will likely get nothing, so you must go after deep pockets if available. Call to discuss if you wish. Don Holben 800-685-6950

Re: Child Molestation

I am posting part of the pertinent Code of Civil Procedure section dealing with your question as it bulletin board allows only up to 3000 characters. I will attempt to post the rest in a subsequent postings. If you have questions or would like a free consultation, do not hesitate to call (323)782-0099.

CCP 340.1. (a) In an action for recovery of damages suffered as a

result of childhood sexual abuse, the time for commencement of the

action shall be within eight years of the date the plaintiff attains

the age of majority or within three years of the date the plaintiff

discovers or reasonably should have discovered that psychological

injury or illness occurring after the age of majority was caused by

the sexual abuse, whichever period expires later, for any of the

following actions:

(1) An action against any person for committing an act of

childhood sexual abuse.

(2) An action for liability against any person or entity who owed

a duty of care to the plaintiff, where a wrongful or negligent act by

that person or entity was a legal cause of the childhood sexual

abuse which resulted in the injury to the plaintiff.

(3) An action for liability against any person or entity where an

intentional act by that person or entity was a legal cause of the

childhood sexual abuse which resulted in the injury to the plaintiff.

Re: Child Molestation

Part 2:

(b) (1) No action described in paragraph (2) or (3) of subdivision

(a) may be commenced on or after the plaintiff's 26th birthday.

(2) This subdivision does not apply if the person or entity knew

or had reason to know, or was otherwise on notice, of any unlawful

sexual conduct by an employee, volunteer, representative, or agent,

and failed to take reasonable steps, and to implement reasonable

safeguards, to avoid acts of unlawful sexual conduct in the future by

that person, including, but not limited to, preventing or avoiding

placement of that person in a function or environment in which

contact with children is an inherent part of that function or

environment. For purposes of this subdivision, providing or

requiring counseling is not sufficient, in and of itself, to

constitute a reasonable step or reasonable safeguard.

(c) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, any claim for

damages described in paragraph (2) or (3) of subdivision (a) that is

permitted to be filed pursuant to paragraph (2) of subdivision (b)

that would otherwise be barred as of January 1, 2003, solely because

the applicable statute of limitations has or had expired, is revived,

and, in that case, a cause of action may be commenced within one

year of January 1, 2003. Nothing in this subdivision shall be

construed to alter the applicable statute of limitations period of an

action that is not time barred as of January 1, 2003.

(d) Subdivision (c) does not apply to either of the following:

(1) Any claim that has been litigated to finality on the merits in

any court of competent jurisdiction prior to January 1, 2003.

Termination of a prior action on the basis of the statute of

limitations does not constitute a claim that has been litigated to

finality on the merits.

(2) Any written, compromised settlement agreement which has been

entered into between a plaintiff and a defendant where the plaintiff

was represented by an attorney who was admitted to practice law in

this state at the time of the settlement, and the plaintiff signed

the agreement.

Re: Child Molestation

Part 3:

(e) "Childhood sexual abuse" as used in this section includes any

act committed against the plaintiff that occurred when the plaintiff

was under the age of 18 years and that would have been proscribed by

Section 266j of the Penal Code; Section 285 of the Penal Code;

paragraph (1) or (2) of subdivision (b), or of subdivision (c), of

Section 286 of the Penal Code; subdivision (a) or (b) of Section 288

of the Penal Code; paragraph (1) or (2) of subdivision (b), or of

subdivision (c), of Section 288a of the Penal Code; subdivision (h),

(i), or (j) of Section 289 of the Penal Code; Section 647.6 of the

Penal Code; or any prior laws of this state of similar effect at the

time the act was committed. Nothing in this subdivision limits the

availability of causes of action permitted under subdivision (a),

including causes of action against persons or entities other than the

alleged perpetrator of the abuse.

(f) Nothing in this section shall be construed to alter the

otherwise applicable burden of proof, as defined in Section 115 of

the Evidence Code, that a plaintiff has in a civil action subject to

this section.

(g) Every plaintiff 26 years of age or older at the time the

action is filed shall file certificates of merit as specified in

subdivision (h).

Re: Child Molestation

Part 4:

(h) Certificates of merit shall be executed by the attorney for

the plaintiff and by a licensed mental health practitioner selected

by the plaintiff declaring, respectively, as follows, setting forth

the facts which support the declaration:

(1) That the attorney has reviewed the facts of the case, that the

attorney has consulted with at least one mental health practitioner

who is licensed to practice and practices in this state and who the

attorney reasonably believes is knowledgeable of the relevant facts

and issues involved in the particular action, and that the attorney

has concluded on the basis of that review and consultation that there

is reasonable and meritorious cause for the filing of the action.

The person consulted may not be a party to the litigation.

(2) That the mental health practitioner consulted is licensed to

practice and practices in this state and is not a party to the

action, that the practitioner is not treating and has not treated the

plaintiff, and that the practitioner has interviewed the plaintiff

and is knowledgeable of the relevant facts and issues involved in the

particular action, and has concluded, on the basis of his or her

knowledge of the facts and issues, that in his or her professional

opinion there is a reasonable basis to believe that the plaintiff had

been subject to childhood sexual abuse.

(3) That the attorney was unable to obtain the consultation

required by paragraph (1) because a statute of limitations would

impair the action and that the certificates required by paragraphs

(1) and (2) could not be obtained before the impairment of the

action. If a certificate is executed pursuant to this paragraph, the

certificates required by paragraphs (1) and (2) shall be filed

within 60 days after filing the complaint.

(i) Where certificates are required pursuant to subdivision (g),

the attorney for the plaintiff shall execute a separate certificate

of merit for each defendant named in the complaint.

Re: Child Molestation

Part 5:

(j) In any action subject to subdivision (g), no defendant may be

served, and the duty to serve a defendant with process does not

attach, until the court has reviewed the certificates of merit filed

pursuant to subdivision (h) with respect to that defendant, and has

found, in camera, based solely on those certificates of merit, that

there is reasonable and meritorious cause for the filing of the

action against that defendant. At that time, the duty to serve that

defendant with process shall attach.

(k) A violation of this section may constitute unprofessional

conduct and may be the grounds for discipline against the attorney.

(l) The failure to file certificates in accordance with this

section shall be grounds for a demurrer pursuant to Section 430.10 or

a motion to strike pursuant to Section 435.

(m) In any action subject to subdivision (g), no defendant may be

named except by "Doe" designation in any pleadings or papers filed

in the action until there has been a showing of corroborative fact as

to the charging allegations against that defendant.

Re: Child Molestation

Part 6:

(n) At any time after the action is filed, the plaintiff may apply

to the court for permission to amend the complaint to substitute the

name of the defendant or defendants for the fictitious designation,

as follows:

(1) The application shall be accompanied by a certificate of

corroborative fact executed by the attorney for the plaintiff. The

certificate shall declare that the attorney has discovered one or

more facts corroborative of one or more of the charging allegations

against a defendant or defendants, and shall set forth in clear and

concise terms the nature and substance of the corroborative fact. If

the corroborative fact is evidenced by the statement of a witness or

the contents of a document, the certificate shall declare that the

attorney has personal knowledge of the statement of the witness or of

the contents of the document, and the identity and location of the

witness or document shall be included in the certificate. For

purposes of this section, a fact is corroborative of an allegation if

it confirms or supports the allegation. The opinion of any mental

health practitioner concerning the plaintiff shall not constitute a

corroborative fact for purposes of this section.

(2) Where the application to name a defendant is made prior to

that defendant's appearance in the action, neither the application

nor the certificate of corroborative fact by the attorney shall be

served on the defendant or defendants, nor on any other party or

their counsel of record.

(3) Where the application to name a defendant is made after that

defendant's appearance in the action, the application shall be served

on all parties and proof of service provided to the court, but the

certificate of corroborative fact by the attorney shall not be served

on any party or their counsel of record.

Re: Child Molestation

Part 7:

(o) The court shall review the application and the certificate of

corroborative fact in camera and, based solely on the certificate and

any reasonable inferences to be drawn from the certificate, shall,

if one or more facts corroborative of one or more of the charging

allegations against a defendant has been shown, order that the

complaint may be amended to substitute the name of the defendant or

defendants.

(p) The court shall keep under seal and confidential from the

public and all parties to the litigation, other than the plaintiff,

any and all certificates of corroborative fact filed pursuant to

subdivision (n).

(q) Upon the favorable conclusion of the litigation with respect

to any defendant for whom a certificate of merit was filed or for

whom a certificate of merit should have been filed pursuant to this

section, the court may, upon the motion of a party or upon the court'

s own motion, verify compliance with this section by requiring the

attorney for the plaintiff who was required by subdivision (h) to

execute the certificate to reveal the name, address, and telephone

number of the person or persons consulted with pursuant to

subdivision (h) that were relied upon by the attorney in preparation

of the certificate of merit. The name, address, and telephone number

shall be disclosed to the trial judge in camera and in the absence

of the moving party. If the court finds there has been a failure to

comply with this section, the court may order a party, a party's

attorney, or both, to pay any reasonable expenses, including attorney'

s fees, incurred by the defendant for whom a certificate of merit

should have been filed.

Re: Child Molestation

Part 8:

(r) The amendments to this section enacted at the 1990 portion of

the 1989-90 Regular Session shall apply to any action commenced on or

after January 1, 1991, including any action otherwise barred by the

period of limitations in effect prior to January 1, 1991, thereby

reviving those causes of action which had lapsed or technically

expired under the law existing prior to January 1, 1991.

(s) The Legislature declares that it is the intent of the

Legislature, in enacting the amendments to this section enacted at

the 1994 portion of the 1993-94 Regular Session, that the express

language of revival added to this section by those amendments shall

apply to any action commenced on or after January 1, 1991.

(t) Nothing in the amendments to this section enacted at the 1998

portion of the 1997-98 Regular Session is intended to create a new

theory of liability.

(u) The amendments to subdivision (a) of this section, enacted at

the 1998 portion of the 1997-98 Regular Session, shall apply to any

action commenced on or after January 1, 1999, and to any action filed

prior to January 1, 1999, and still pending on that date, including

any action or causes of action which would have been barred by the

laws in effect prior to January 1, 1999. Nothing in this subdivision

is intended to revive actions or causes of action as to which there

has been a final adjudication prior to January 1, 1999.

Re: Child Molestation

The maximum length of the statute expired on your 26th birthday.