California childhood sexual abuse claims: deadlines, certificates of merit and the 2027 changes

By Michael Shemtoub, trial attorney, Beverly Law. Updated November 2026.

Start with the date of the abuse

AB 452 rewrote CCP 340.1 effective January 1, 2024. It now sets no time limit for suing the abuser, a person or entity that owed the child a duty of care and whose wrongful or negligent act was a legal cause of the assault, or one whose intentional act was a legal cause. Childhood sexual assault means listed Penal Code offenses against someone under 18.

Subdivision (p) limits the no-deadline rule to abuse that occurred on or after January 1, 2024. Earlier abuse follows the statute of limitations as it read on December 31, 2023, now set out in CCP 340.11 (added by SB 558 in 2023).

Abuse before 2024: age 40 or the discovery rule

Under CCP 340.11(a)(1), a survivor of abuse that happened before 2024 has two possible deadlines, and the one that ends later controls. The first is 22 years after turning 18, which is the 40th birthday. The second runs from the date the survivor discovers, or reasonably should have discovered, that a psychological injury or illness occurring after age 18 was caused by the abuse. A survivor born in 1995, for example, can rely on the age rule until the 40th birthday in 2035.

Today the discovery period is five years. SB 577 (Stats. 2026, ch. 971) changes it to three. SB 577 is not an urgency bill, and under Article IV, section 8(c) of the California Constitution a regular-session statute takes effect on the January 1 after a 90-day period from enactment. That makes the three-year period effective January 1, 2027. The bill text contains no transition rule for a survivor whose five-year period is already running. If you are past 40 and relying on discovery, get advice before that date.

Suing an organization at 40 or older

For abuse before 2024, a duty-of-care or intentional-act claim against someone other than the abuser cannot be filed on or after the plaintiff’s 40th birthday unless one of two things is true (CCP 340.11(c)):

• The person or entity knew or had reason to know, or was otherwise on notice, of misconduct that creates a risk of childhood sexual assault by an employee, volunteer, representative or agent.
• The person or entity failed to take reasonable steps or to put reasonable safeguards in place to avoid acts of childhood sexual assault.

The current text adds that providing or requiring counseling is not enough, by itself, to count as a reasonable step or safeguard. SB 577’s version of subdivision (c) leaves that sentence out. For abuse on or after January 1, 2024, CCP 340.1 has no age cutoff for claims against organizations.

The 2020 revival window has closed

A revival rule now kept in CCP 340.11(q) reopened claims that had not been litigated to finality and that would otherwise have been barred as of January 1, 2020, because a statute of limitations, a claim presentation deadline or another time limit had run. Those claims could be filed within three years of January 1, 2020. That window is closed. A survivor who missed it may still qualify under the rules above. Windows for abuse in adulthood (CCP 340.16) are on our sexual abuse statute of limitations page.

Certificates of merit and “Doe” defendants

Every plaintiff who is 40 or older on the day the case is filed must file certificates of merit (CCP 340.1(e)-(f), CCP 340.11(f)-(g)). There are two:

• The attorney’s certificate. The lawyer declares that they reviewed the facts, consulted at least one knowledgeable mental health practitioner, and found reasonable and meritorious cause to file, with a separate certificate for each defendant.
• The practitioner’s certificate. A mental health practitioner licensed and practicing in California, who is not a party and is not treating and has never treated the plaintiff, declares that they interviewed the plaintiff and believe there is a reasonable basis to conclude the plaintiff was sexually abused as a child.

No defendant may be served until a judge reviews the certificates privately and finds reasonable and meritorious cause as to that defendant. Defendants are named as “Doe” until a judge, reviewing the attorney’s sealed certificate of corroborative fact in private, allows their names to be substituted. A mental health practitioner’s opinion about the plaintiff does not count as a corroborative fact. Missing certificates are grounds for a demurrer or a motion to strike.

For pre-2024 abuse, CCP 340.11(g)(3) lets the attorney certify that a deadline would run before the consultation could happen, with the full certificates due within 60 days. From January 1, 2027, SB 577 requires certificates to be filed with the complaint, bars clerks from accepting a complaint without them, and adds a new attorney declaration listed in the table below.

Up to triple damages for a cover-up

A survivor who proves that the assault resulted from a cover-up can recover up to triple damages from a defendant found to have covered up the sexual assault of a minor, unless another law bars it (CCP 340.1(b); CCP 340.11(b)). Under the statute, a cover-up is a concerted effort to hide evidence of childhood sexual assault.

Public entities have a separate shield. Government Code 818 says a public entity is not liable for punitive damages or other damages imposed mainly to make an example of and punish the defendant. SB 577 adds a sentence to both sections, effective January 1, 2027, stating that the treble-damages rule does not apply to a public entity defendant. Neither rule protects a private organization.

Public school districts and other public entities

Before suing a California public entity over an injury, a person usually has to present a government claim first, and for a personal injury the deadline is six months after the claim accrues (Gov. Code 911.2). Childhood sexual assault claims are treated differently. Government Code 905(m) exempts claims under CCP 340.1 against local public entities, and under Gov. Code 935(f), claim procedures that a local agency sets for itself do not apply to these claims either. CCP 340.1(q) and 340.11(s) go further: these claims do not have to be presented to any government entity before a lawsuit is filed.

Under Gov. Code 815.2, a public entity is liable for an injury its employee causes while acting within the scope of employment if the employee personally could have been sued for the act. Unless a statute says otherwise, the entity is not liable when the employee is immune.

SB 577 adds CCP 340.12 for one group of cases: abuse before 2024, a lawsuit against a public entity filed on or after January 1, 2026, by a plaintiff 40 or older, on a duty-of-care or intentional-act theory. That plaintiff must prove by clear and convincing evidence that the entity knew of misconduct that resulted in childhood sexual assault by an employee, volunteer, representative or agent and failed to take reasonable steps or safeguards, and that it negligently discharged a mandatory duty. The higher burden does not apply after a judgment or final settlement. Section 340.12 also lists factors for a motion to reduce the verdict and lets the entity pay damages over time. SB 577 takes effect in 2027, but the text of section 340.12 covers cases filed on or after January 1, 2026.

SB 577 at a glance

The Governor signed SB 577 on September 30, 2026 (Chapter 971, Statutes of 2026). The parts that affect these lawsuits:

What this means for your case

Three dates shape these claims: when the abuse happened, your 40th birthday, and when you linked an adult injury to it. Practical steps:

• Write down the years the abuse took place, and whether any of it happened on or after January 1, 2024.
• If the abuse was before 2024 and you are near or past 40, talk to a lawyer before January 1, 2027, when the discovery period shrinks to three years.
• List every organization involved and note whether it is public or private, because the rules differ.
• Keep anything showing what the organization knew, such as emails, complaint letters and names of staff who were told.
• Expect that a therapist who has treated you cannot sign the certificate of merit. The law requires a separate practitioner.

Our pages on suing an institution for sexual abuse and on suing a school explain how liability works. Beverly Law represents survivors in California. Call (310) 552-6959 for a free, confidential consultation in English or Spanish. You owe no fees or costs unless we win.

Common questions

Related pages

What is the statute of limitations for sexual abuse lawsuits? · Can you sue a school for sexual abuse? · Can you sue an institution for sexual abuse? · California injury lawyers · Legal guides

Important: This page is general information, not legal or medical advice, and reading it does not create an attorney-client relationship. Every case is different; talk to a lawyer about yours. Last reviewed: November 10, 2026.