-  This bill is not active in this session.
 
     
  •  Summary 
  •  
  •  Actions 
  •  
  •  Committee Votes 
  •  
  •  Floor Votes 
  •  
  •  Memo 
  •  
  •  Text 
  •  
  •  LFIN 
  •  
  •  Chamber Video/Transcript 

A02683 Summary:

BILL NOA02683
 
SAME ASSAME AS UNI. S02440
 
SPONSORRosenthal L
 
COSPNSRDinowitz, Heastie, Peoples-Stokes, Englebright, Gunther, Otis, Jaffee, Stirpe, Simotas, Galef, Mosley, Lifton, Barrett, Paulin, Arroyo, Walker, Weprin, Bichotte, Simon, Blake, Cahill, Seawright, Barron, Buchwald, Bronson, Hevesi, Hyndman, Ortiz, Nolan, Jones, Carroll, Rivera, Glick, Niou, De La Rosa, Pretlow, Gottfried, D'Urso, Vanel, Titus, Jean-Pierre, Fernandez, Benedetto, Cruz, Epstein, Frontus, Griffin, Jacobson, Quart, Reyes, Richardson, Romeo, Ryan, Sayegh, Burke, Steck, Woerner, Buttenschon, Fall, Fahy, Zebrowski, Perry
 
MLTSPNSR
 
Amd §30.10, CP L; amd §208, R3403, add §214-g, CPLR; amd §§50-e & 50-i, Gen Muni L; amd §10, Ct Claims Act; amd §3813, Ed L; amd §219-c, add §219-d, Judy L
 
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 55 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.
Go to top

A02683 Memo:

NEW YORK STATE ASSEMBLY
MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF LEGISLATION
submitted in accordance with Assembly Rule III, Sec 1(f)
 
BILL NUMBER: A2683                      revised 1/25/2019
 
SPONSOR: Rosenthal L
  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 prefer- ence to such actions; to amend the general municipal 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 training 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 limitation 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. Would amend the statute of limitations in criminal actions alleging a sex crime against a child under the age of 18. Currently, class felony sex crimes have no statute of limitations, and for other sex crime felonies, a five year statute of limitations begins to run when the victim turns 18. For misdemeanors, current law has a two year statute of limitations, which also starts to run at age 18. This bill section applies to all sex crimes against children which have a statute of limitations and starts the statute running when the victim reaches age 23,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. Would amend the statute of limitations in civil actions that 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, would permit an action to be commenced on or before the date the victim reaches 55 years of age. Section 3. Would allow for time barred-actions in which such conduct against a child is alleged to be revived, and not be barred by any stat- ute of limitation otherwise existing in law or the failure to file a notice of claim. Such revival would only take place within a one year window that commences six months from the effective date of the act. Section 4. Would establish a special trial preference for cases that have been revived pursuant to this Act. Sections 5, 6, 7, and 8. Would remove notice of claim requirements with respect to certain governmental entities in actions alleging damages resulting from the commission of certain sex offenses thus putting these governmental an non-governmental defendants on an equal footing. Present law, which generally requires that a notice of claim be served prior to commencing such an action, would not apply to these types of actions. Section 9. Would require the office of court administration to provide training for judges concerning crimes involving the sexual abuse of minors. Section 10. Would require the chief administrator of the courts to promulgate rules concerning the timely adjudication of claims revived pursuant to bill section 3. Section 11 is a severability clause.   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 on 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 applicable 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 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. Further, the bill provides for particularized 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: 2018 - A.5885-A (Rosenthal) - Passed Assembly 2017 - A.5885-A (Rosenthal) - Passed Assembly 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.
Go to top