(1) Existing law requires that specified actions for recovery of damages suffered as a result of childhood sexual assault that occurred before January 1, 2024, be commenced within 22 years of the date the plaintiff attains the age of majority or within 5 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 assault, whichever period expires later. Existing law provides that there is no time limit for commencement of such actions for recovery of damages suffered as a result of childhood sexual assault which occurred on or after January 1, 2024. Actions subject to these time limits include actions for liability against any person or entity who owed a duty of care to the plaintiff and an action for liability against any person or entity for an intentional act that was the legal cause of the childhood sexual assault. Existing law provides that in actions against entities for violation of a duty of care, the plaintiff must establish that the entity acted wrongfully or negligently.

This bill would shorten the amount of time a victim of childhood sexual assault that occurred before January 1, 2024, would have to file a specified action to 22 years from the date the plaintiff attains the age of majority or within 3 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 assault, whichever period expires later. This bill would, for actions filed on or after April 15, 2025, against a public entity, or one of its employees or agents, by a plaintiff who is 40 years of age or older, increase the standard of liability to gross negligence. For all cases against a public entity filed on or after April 15, 2025, this bill would provide factors that courts must consider when reviewing motions for remittitur and would authorize a court to structure judgments against public entities so that they could be paid over time.

This bill would require all cases filed by victims of childhood sexual assault that occurred at the MacLaren Children’s Center or any juvenile probation facility or detention center operated by the Los Angeles County Probation Department that was closed before or on January 1, 2020, be filed on or before January 1, 2026. This bill specifies that the procedural requirements that typically apply to such causes of action, including the requirement that plaintiffs who file their claims at the age of 40 or greater file a certificate of merit, as specified, also apply to these specific cases. This bill would require that in these cases, certificates of merit along with additional information shall be provided to a court-appointed special master. This bill would prohibit a special master from distributing funds pursuant to a settlement agreement until all of those requirements have been satisfied.

(2) For actions for recovery of damages suffered as a result of childhood sexual assault that occurred before January 1, 2024, existing law requires a plaintiff 40 years of age or older at the time the action is filed to file certificates of merit. Existing law provides that the failure to file certificates in accordance with these provisions is grounds for a demurrer.

This bill would instead require the certificates to be filed concurrently with the complaint and would prohibit a court clerk from accepting the filing of a complaint that lacks the certificates, except as specified.

(3) Existing law authorizes a person who is sexually assaulted and who proves it was as the result of a cover up, as defined, to recover up to treble damages against the defendant who is found to have covered up the sexual assault, unless prohibited by another law.

This bill would prohibit such treble damages from being imposed against a defendant that is a public entity.

(4) Under existing law, bonds, warrants, contracts, obligations, and evidences of indebtedness, for the purpose of validating proceedings, are deemed to be in existence upon their authorization, as specified.

This bill would provide that, for purposes of determining the validity of refunding bonds to refund a tort action judgment entered against a public agency, as specified, indebtedness is deemed to be in existence on the date of adoption by the governing body of the public agency of a resolution or ordinance, as specified.

(5) Existing law permits a defendant or a cross-defendant in a civil proceeding under the Government Claims Act, or in any civil action for indemnity or contribution, to seek from the court, at the time of the granting of a motion for summary judgment, directed verdict, motion for judgment in a nonjury trial, or nonsuit dismissing the moving party other than the plaintiff, petitioner, cross-complainant, or intervenor, a determination of whether the plaintiff, petitioner, cross-complainant, or intervenor brought their proceeding in good faith and with reasonable cause. If the court determines that the proceeding was not brought in good faith or with reasonable cause, existing law requires the court to decide the reasonable and necessary defense costs incurred by the party opposing the proceeding and to render judgment in favor of that party. Existing law applies these provisions only if the defendant or cross-defendant has made a motion for summary judgment, a motion for directed verdict, a motion for judgment in a nonjury trial, or nonsuit.

This bill would expand the above provision to apply to a demurrer brought by a defendant or cross-defendant. The bill would also prohibit an award of defense costs under these provisions against an attorney from being passed on to a client as a litigation cost.

(6) Existing law, the California School Finance Authority Act, authorizes a participating party, as defined, in connection with securing financing or refinancing of a project, or working capital, as defined, to elect to provide for funding payments of bonds issued by the California School Finance Authority and related obligations by electing to participate in a state or local intercept, or both, by an action of its governing board. Existing law requires the Controller, the county treasurer, or other appropriate county fiscal officer, as applicable, upon receipt of written notice provided by the participating party, to make an apportionment or revenue transfer from specified moneys designated for apportionment to the participating party.

(7) Existing law authorizes the governing board of a school district that determines during a fiscal year that its revenues are less than the amount necessary to meet its current year expenditure obligations to request an emergency apportionment through the Superintendent of Public Instruction, subject to specified requirements. Existing law prescribes the financing conditions on emergency apportionments, including a requirement for a school district to develop a schedule to repay the emergency loan, which the county superintendent of schools is required to review, comment on, and submit to the Superintendent for approval.

Existing law authorizes emergency apportionments to be provided through an interim loan from the General Fund and lease financing to be made available by the California Infrastructure and Economic Development Bank, which is authorized to issue bonds for purposes of the emergency apportionments and related costs. Existing law prohibits the term of the lease from exceeding 20 years, except as specified. Existing law authorizes, as an alternative to lease financing, emergency apportionments to be provided from the General Fund. Existing law requires the emergency apportionment to be repaid within 20 years.

This bill would provide that, with regard to certain mandates, no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.