Time Limits and Childhood Abuse Claims in California: A Plain-Language Starting Point

"Is it too late?" is one of the first questions survivors ask, and one of the hardest to answer in general terms. The honest answer is: it depends. It depends on what happened, when it happened, where it happened, and who is responsible.

This article explains the basic framework California uses for childhood sexual assault claims, what changed in recent years, and why claims involving programs in other states may follow different rules. It is a starting point for a conversation, not a substitute for one.

Why time limits exist, and why they are complicated here

Every state sets time limits, called statutes of limitations, for filing civil lawsuits. But lawmakers have increasingly recognized that survivors of childhood abuse often can't talk about what happened until many years later. As a result, the rules for these claims have changed several times, and different rules can apply depending on when the abuse occurred.

California's current rule for childhood sexual assault

California's main statute for these claims is Code of Civil Procedure section 340.1. It was amended by AB 452 (Statutes 2023, Chapter 655), effective January 1, 2024.

Under the current text:

• There is no time limit to file an action for damages suffered as a result of childhood sexual assault. That covers claims against the person who committed the assault, and claims against a person or entity that owed a duty of care to the survivor if their wrongful or negligent act, or an intentional act, was a legal cause of the assault.
• This applies to childhood sexual assault that occurred on or after January 1, 2024.
• For childhood sexual assault that occurred on or before December 31, 2023, the statute says a claim may only be brought under the statute of limitations in existing law "as it read on December 31, 2023."

The statute defines "childhood sexual assault" by reference to specific Penal Code sections, for acts committed when the plaintiff was under 18. It also allows up to treble damages against a defendant found to have covered up the sexual assault of a minor, unless another law prohibits it.

For most adult survivors reading this, the abuse happened before 2024. So the older rules are the ones that usually matter.

The rules for abuse before 2024

As the Legislative Counsel's summary of AB 452 describes it, the law in effect before 2024 generally required these claims to be filed within 22 years after the survivor turned 18, or within 5 years after the survivor discovered, or reasonably should have discovered, that a psychological injury or illness occurring after age 18 was caused by the sexual assault, whichever is later.

That prior law also limited certain claims against third parties, such as institutions, from being filed on or after the survivor's 40th birthday, unless specific conditions were met. Those conditions involved whether the person or entity knew or had reason to know of misconduct that created a risk of childhood sexual assault, or failed to take reasonable steps or safeguards. AB 452 removed that age-40 restriction going forward.

A 2026 change: SB 577

In 2026 the Legislature passed SB 577 (Statutes 2026, Chapter 971). For childhood sexual assault that happened before January 1, 2024, it shortens the discovery period: the time to file becomes within 22 years after the survivor turned 18, or within 3 years (instead of 5) after the survivor discovered, or reasonably should have discovered, that a psychological injury or illness occurring after age 18 was caused by the assault, whichever is later. For cases against a public entity (such as a county, school district or state agency) filed on or after January 1, 2026 by a survivor who is 40 or older, SB 577 also adds a higher burden of proof and additional filing requirements.

If your discovery happened more than three years ago, or if your claim involves a public entity, this change may matter a great deal. Talk with a lawyer promptly rather than waiting.

How these rules apply to a particular survivor depends on dates and facts. A lawyer should review them with you.

The revival window that closed

In 2019, AB 218 (Statutes 2019, Chapter 861) revived childhood sexual assault claims that would otherwise have been barred as of January 1, 2020 because a statute of limitations, claim presentation deadline or other time limit had expired. Revived claims could be filed within three years of January 1, 2020. That window has closed.

That window closing does not automatically mean every older claim is gone. Some survivors may still be within the regular time periods described above.

Claims involving public entities

Claims against government entities in California often require a formal written claim before a lawsuit. For childhood sexual assault claims described in section 340.1, the current statute says that claim presentation requirement does not apply. If a public school, county or other government agency is involved, ask a lawyer how this applies to your dates.

What about abuse that wasn't sexual?

Not every claim from a youth program involves sexual abuse. Survivors also describe physical abuse, restraint, isolation, false imprisonment, and medical neglect.

Those claims are generally governed by different statutes. In California, Code of Civil Procedure section 335.1 sets a two-year period for an action for assault, battery, or injury caused by the wrongful act or neglect of another. Code of Civil Procedure section 352 provides that, for claims covered by that chapter, time while the person is a minor generally does not count toward the limit, though that rule does not apply to certain claims against public entities.

Other doctrines can affect when a time limit starts or whether it is paused, and some claims may have their own rules. Because these are fact-specific, this is an area where a consult early on is especially valuable. Please don't assume a non-sexual abuse claim is either alive or gone without asking.

Programs in other states may follow other states' laws

Many Southern California teens were sent to programs in Utah, Nevada, Idaho, Montana, Arizona, Oregon, Washington and elsewhere. When the harm happened in another state, that state's law may govern which time limits apply, and those can be very different from California's. Sometimes there are arguments about which state's law applies, and the answer can make a real difference.

For Utah, our sister site has a guide on delayed disclosure and whether it is too late in Utah and another on what Utah therapists hear about troubled-teen programs.

For background on California's out-of-state placement laws, see California law and out-of-state youth programs. For first steps, see Sent away from Southern California as a teen.

Why an early consult matters

An article can't tell you your own deadline, because that depends on details we don't have here. What we can say:

• Time limits can be different for each defendant in the same case.
• The date, the place and the type of harm all matter.
• Laws in this area have changed several times and may change again.
• Records and witnesses are easier to find sooner rather than later.

A confidential case review can help you understand where you stand. It doesn't commit you to anything.

Frank Stucki, Esq., MBA focuses on institutional and troubled-teen abuse cases. He handles cases in California, Nevada, Washington and Utah, and survivors from anywhere can reach out. Cases in other states are handled with local co-counsel licensed there.

Start a confidential case review at pchinjurylaw.com or call (310) 299-9PCH ((310) 299-9724). Please don't put sensitive details in web forms or emails. A name, number and good time to call is enough.

FAQ

Is there really no time limit in California now?

For childhood sexual assault that occurred on or after January 1, 2024, the current text of Code of Civil Procedure section 340.1 says there is no time limit for the actions it covers. For abuse before 2024, the older rules apply.

I missed the 2020–2022 revival window. Is my claim gone?

Not necessarily. The revival window was one path. Depending on your age and when you connected your injuries to the abuse, the regular time periods under the older law may still apply. Have a lawyer look at your dates.

I'm over 40. Can I still file?

It depends. Under the law in effect before 2024, certain claims against institutions filed after age 40 required specific conditions to be met. Whether those conditions are met depends on your facts.

The abuse happened in another state. Does California law apply?

Maybe, maybe not. The law of the state where the program was located often matters, and some cases have connections to more than one state. This is one of the first questions a case review should answer.

I'm not ready to file anything. Should I still talk to a lawyer?

Yes, if you can. A consult is about information, not commitment. Learning where you stand on time limits early protects your choices, including the choice to wait.

Frank Stucki, Esq., MBA is licensed in California, Nevada, Washington and Utah; cases in other states are handled with local co-counsel licensed there.

This article is general information, not legal advice. Reading it does not create an attorney-client relationship. Attorney Advertising.

Sources

• https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?sectionNum=340.1.&lawCode=CCP
• https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtml?bill_id=202320240AB452
• https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtml?bill_id=201920200AB218
• https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?sectionNum=335.1.&lawCode=CCP
• https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?sectionNum=352.&lawCode=CCP
• https://slcsurvivorlaw.com/resources/delayed-disclosure-is-it-too-late-utah
• https://slcsurvivorlaw.com/resources/troubled-teen-programs-what-therapists-hear-utah
• https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtml?bill_id=202520260SB577