A look at 15 states making it easier to sue over sex abuse

[billingsgazette.com – 12/3/19]

Eight states and the District of Columbia have established “lookback windows” allowing people to sue no matter how long ago the alleged abuse took place. They can file civil suits against both their alleged abusers such as priests and the church or other institutions where they worked.

NEW YORK — One-year window allowing previously barred suits opened August 14. After that, suits allowed until age 55, up from 23 before the law was passed.

NEW JERSEY — Two-year window opened Dec. 1. After that ends, suits allowed until age 55, up from 20.

CALIFORNIA — Three-year window opens Jan. 1, 2020. Triple damages if cover-up is proven. After window closes, suits allowed until age 40, up from 26.

ARIZONA — Nineteen-month window opened in June. After it closes, suits allowed until age 30, up from 20.

MONTANA — One-year window opened May 7. After that ends, suits allowed until age 27, up from 24.

HAWAII — A previous window for filing old claims was first opened in 2012. It was reopened in 2018 and lasts until April 2020.

VERMONT — Eliminated age limits in May and window never expires.
Seven other states changed statute of limitations so victims could file civil cases alleging abuse later in life. Many states also have “discovery” rules allowing alleged victims to sue even later if they can show they only realized the impact of the abuse in recent years.
ALABAMA — Raised age limit to file to 25 from 21 this year.

Related posts

Notify of

We welcome a lively discussion with all view points - keeping in mind...


  1. Your submission will be reviewed by one of our volunteer moderators. Moderating decisions may be subjective.
  2. Please keep the tone of your comment civil and courteous. This is a public forum.
  3. Swear words should be starred out such as f*k and s*t
  4. Please stay on topic - both in terms of the organization in general and this post in particular.
  5. Please refrain from general political statements in (dis)favor of one of the major parties or their representatives.
  6. Please take personal conversations off this forum.
  7. We will not publish any comments advocating for violent or any illegal action.
  8. We cannot connect participants privately - feel free to leave your contact info here. You may want to create a new / free, readily available email address.
  9. Please refrain from copying and pasting repetitive and lengthy amounts of text.
  10. Please do not post in all Caps.
  11. If you wish to link to a serious and relevant media article, legitimate advocacy group or other pertinent web site / document, please provide the full link. No abbreviated / obfuscated links. Posts that include a URL may take considerably longer to be approved.
  12. We suggest to compose lengthy comments in a desktop text editor and copy and paste them into the comment form
  13. We will not publish any posts containing any names not mentioned in the original article.
  14. Please choose a short user name that does not contain links to other web sites or identify real people
  15. Please do not solicit funds
  16. If you use any abbreviation such as Failure To Register (FTR), or any others, the first time you use it please expand it for new people to better understand.
  17. All commenters are required to provide a real email address where we can contact them.  It will not be displayed on the site.
  18. Please send any input regarding moderation or other website issues via email to moderator [at] all4consolaws [dot] org
  19. We no longer post articles about arrests or accusations, only selected convictions. If your comment contains a link to an arrest or accusation article we will not approve your comment.
ACSOL, including but not limited to its board members and agents, does not provide legal advice on this website.  In addition, ACSOL warns that those who provide comments on this website may or may not be legal professionals on whose advice one can reasonably rely.  

Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Basically, Another feel good law, as most RC would too broke or homeless to sue.

There is a real problem with having little to no time restrictions. The condition called “false memory” is a real condition someone remembers an event that had never actually occurred or had occurred with someone else. There’s a Ted Talk on YouTube discussing the condition.

@Robert Curtis – yes, “The condition called “false memory” is a real condition someone remembers an event that had never actually occurred or had occurred with someone else.”

I had thought and was under the impression when this statute of limitations subject started coming up over the past year or so that the single most reason why there is a statute of limitations is due to “false memory”. So are we to understand that this “false memory” does not have any affect on persons that may have been sexually abused 50 years ago and that their memory is as crystal clear as the day it apparently took place? Heck, I’m 63 and I still have a very good memory. Traumatic memory of when I first found out I had legal troubles was very traumatic but for the life of me I can’t remember all the details during that time and that was only 15 years ago. So how in the heck is anyone supposed to remember all details of something going back 20, 25, 50 years? Or maybe it is as simple as saying if someone accuses you of doing something 50 years ago then I guess it is true even if you can’t remember doing it or you never did.

Oh here comes the money witches. I would not like to be a famous singer or band or tv actor in this life time. Women are out for the money. The ( me too ) gang are getting laws passed with no problem.

Interesting. I think you all have it wrong! I bet a lawyer pushed for this. This clearly sets the tone for civil $ suites! I actually (true story) hooked up (yes/true/I won’t lie) with a younger woman (late 20’s) online and had a very kinkyonline fling where we had ex within 60 mins of online chatting. USC Graduate, works with troubled (Director) children for a school district (used a fake email address/name/I found out her real identity later/she freaked) and just so happens has (her name is unique/showed as soon as I googled her name) filed a multi million dollar lawsuit against the gynecologist at USC? I found her to be dishonest, a nympho/requested I do things she accused the Dr of doing and shady. If you saw her, you would have no clue! In (true/honest story) summary, I don’t believe her story and I clearly feel people’s lives could be destroyed by money! True and verifiable story!

This woman (26-27) attended USC, got an internship for a well known public school district, became the director of student services and is now accusing (it was all over the news) the USC Gynecologist of abusing her? 1. She should (I never thought I would say this) be held at higher standards. She met me at Starbucks/slipped in my car and to be completely honest, had some intriguing fetishes to say the least. I was a bit shocked after finding out her position and history! Didn’t make sense. When I was arrested 20 plus years ago, my attorney represented a young man in a tough/prosecute to the fullest city! The ex accused him of rape! They later found out she lied and had done this to another ex? Disgusting to say the least. In conclusion, I found the young lady I met to clearly (voyeur/exhibitionist/outdoor interests/threesomes/give me your hand/liked older men/doublelist website/using fake name/email) to be questionable. I don’t think most sexual abuse victims hook up with guys online, go to their house and have unprotected sex! ? I think this bill is going to create more heartache then resolution!

1001 reasons why former prosecutors must be barred by oath to abstain from seeking congressional seats. The law must be apparent and clear to basically educated person.
Our founders knew it would get like this.