Provides that the statute of limitations for criminal prosecution of a sexual offense committed against a child shall not begin to run until the child turns 23 years of age; provides that a civil action for conduct constituting a sexual offense against a child, shall be brought before the child turns 50 years of age; revives previously barred actions related to sexual abuse of children; grants civil trial preference to such actions; eliminates the notice of claim requirements for such actions when the action is brought against a municipality, the state or a school district; requires judicial training relating to child abuse and the establishment of rules relating to civil actions brought for sexual offenses committed against children.
NEW YORK STATE ASSEMBLY MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF LEGISLATION submitted in accordance with Assembly Rule III, Sec 1(f)
BILL NUMBER: A5885A
SPONSOR: Rosenthal TITLE OF BILL: An act to amend the criminal procedure law, in
relation to the statute of limitations in criminal prosecution of a
sexual offense committed against a child; to amend the civil practice
law and rules, in relation to the statute of limitations for civil
actions related to a sexual offense committed against a child, reviving
such actions otherwise barred by the existing statute of limitations and
granting trial preference to such actions; to amend the general munici-
pal law, in relation to providing that the notice of claim provisions
shall not apply to such actions; to amend the court of claims act, in
relation to providing that the notice of intention to file provisions
shall not apply to such actions; to amend the education law, in relation
to providing that the notice of claim provisions shall not apply to such
actions; and to amend the judiciary law, in relation to judicial train-
ing relating to sexual abuse of minors and rules reviving civil actions
relating to sexual offenses committed against children
PURPOSE OR GENERAL IDEA OF BILL:
The bill amends the Criminal Procedure Law and the Civil Practice Laws
and Rules to extend the statutes of limitations in criminal and civil
cases involving the sexual abuse of children. It also amends the Civil
Practice Law and Rules to allow, under certain circumstances, the
revival of previously time barred civil actions which allege conduct
representing the commission of certain sexual offenses committed against
a child less than eighteen years of age.
SUMMARY OF SPECIFIC PROVISIONS:
Section 1. Amends the statute of limitations in criminal actions alleg-
ing a sex crime against a child under the age of 18. Currently, all B
felony sex crimes have no statute of limitations, and for other sex
crime felonies, a five year statute of limitations starts to run when
the victim turns 18. For misdemeanors, current law contains a two year
statute of limitations, which also starts to run at age 18. This
section applies to all sex crimes against children which have a statute
of limitations and starts the statute running at age 23 of the victim,
instead of 18. The statute of limitations in criminal matters is not
itself changed, just when the statute of limitations clock starts to
run.
Section 2. Amends the statute of limitations in civil actions which
allege conduct which would constitute a sex crime against a child under
the age of 18. Currently, the statute of limitations typically begins to
run when the victim turns 18. This section, as amended, now permits an
action to be commenced on or before the victim reaches 50 years of age.
Section 3. Allows for time barred actions in which such conduct is
alleged to be revived, and not be barred by any statute of limitation
otherwise existing in law. Such revival can only take place within a one
year window which commences six months from the effective date of the
act.
Section 4. Sets standards for motions to dismiss such revived actions,
and to dismiss certain affirmative defenses in these actions. In any
such action, an affirmative defense in equity alleging lathes, delay, or
material impairment in the defense of investigation of the claim must be
supported by a certificate of merit submitted by a person with knowledge
of the facts.
Section 5. Establishes a special trial preference for cases which have
been revived pursuant to this Act.
Sections 6, 7, 8, and 9 remove notice of claim requirements in actions
alleging damages resulting from the commission of certain sexual
offenses against governmental entities, thus putting governmental and
non-governmental defendants on an equal footing. Present law, which
requires that a notice of claim must first be served prior to commencing
such actions, would not apply to these types of actions.
Section 10. Would require the office of court administration to provide
training for judges concerning crimes involving the sexual abuse of
minors.
Section 11. Would require the chief administrator of the courts to
promulgate rules concerning the timely adjudication of claims revived
pursuant to Section 3.
EFFECTS OF PRESENT LAW WHICH THIS BILL WOULD ALTER:
This bill would alter the statute of limitations, as contained in the
criminal procedure law and the civil practice law and rules, for certain
acts committed against minors. The bill also eliminates notice of claim
requirements in certain cases.
JUSTIFICATION:
The societal plague of sexual abuse against minors is now well-document-
ed. Also well-established is how certain abusers - sometimes aided by
institutional enablers and facilitators - have been successful in cover-
ing up their heinous acts against children, either by guile, threats,
intimidation, and/or attacks upon child-victims.
Compounding the effects of these crimes against children has been the
consistent locking of the courthouse door to child Sex abuse victims who
wish to have their day in court against their abusers, typically as a
result of the passage of time in bringing these claims. Indeed, Judge
Carmen Ciparick, writing for the Court of Appeals, Stated that if
victims of child sex abuse are to be able to obtain judicial relief, the
Legislature must first amend our existing statute of limitations laws
accordingly (Zumpano v Quinn, 6 NY3d 666, 677 (2006) ("Any exception to
be made to allow these types of claims to proceed outside of the appli-
cable statutes of limitations would be for the Legislature, as other
states have done.")).
This bill represents just such a legislative exception. The bill is a
legislative acknowledgment of the unique character of sex crimes against
children, which can have a multitude of effects upon victims, including
being justifiably delayed in otherwise timely taking action against
their abusers and/or those who facilitated in their abuse. The bill
sets up a specific framework for the revival of actions in which the
courthouse door has been closed to victims, whether or not a victim
previously attempted to litigate in the face of the aforementioned
clearly stated legal authority against them.
The bill requires that affirmative defenses of, for example, 'aches, be
supported by a certificate of merit submitted by a person with knowledge
outlining the basis for the defense. Further, the bill provides for
particularized judicial training for judges concerning issues unique to
the adjudication of sex crimes committed against minors.
In sum, it was an extraordinary confluence of events which resulted in
the systematic sexual abuse of minors coming to light, and this has
resulted in this bill, which seeks to allow victims to have their day in
court and prove their claims.
PRIOR LEGISLATIVE HISTORY:
2016- A.10600(Markey)- Reported to Rules
2016- A.2872(Markey)- Referred to Codes
2015- A.2872(Markey)- Reported to Rules
2014- A.1771A(Markey)- Referred to Codes
2013- A.1771(Markey)- Referred to Codes
2012- A.10814(Markey)- Referred to Codes
2011- A.10814(Markey)- Referred to Codes
2010 - A.2596 (Markey) - Referred to Codes
2009 - A.2596(Markey) Third Reading
2008 - A.4560B(Markey) - Passed Assembly
2007 - A.4560B(Markey) - Passed Assembly
2006 - A.11723(Markey) - Passed Assembly
FISCAL IMPLICATIONS FOR STATE AND LOCAL GOVERNMENTS:
To be determined.
EFFECTIVE DATE:
Immediately, except that section ten shall take effect six months after
becoming law, provided that training for revived cases shall commence
three months after becoming law; and section eleven shall take effect
three months after becoming law.
