|
|
Summary |
Text of Statute |
Commentary |
Resources |
Summary:
Claims based upon intentional conduct, i.e. against a perpetrator,
must be brought within 7 years of the act of abuse, or 7 years that the
victim discovered or reasonably should have discovered that his/her
injuries were caused by the sexual abuse. R.I. Gen. Laws
§ 9-1-51. Claims against non-perpetrators
must be brought under the general tort statute of limitations. Suits
must be filed within 3 years of the acts constituting negligence. R.I. Gen. Laws §
9-1-14(b).
Text:
§ 9-1-51. Limitation on actions
based on sexual abuse or exploitation of a child
(a) All claims or causes of action based on intentional conduct
brought by any person for recovery of damages for injury suffered as a
result of childhood sexual abuse shall be commenced within seven (7)
years of the act alleged to have caused the injury or condition, or
seven (7) years of the time the victim discovered or reasonably should
have discovered that the injury or condition was caused by the act,
whichever period expires later.
(b) The victim need not establish which act in a series of continuing
sexual abuse or exploitation incidents cause the injury complained of,
but may compute the date of discovery from the date of the last act by
the same perpetrator which is part of a common scheme or plan of sexual
abuse or exploitation.
(c) The knowledge of a custodial parent or guardian shall not be imputed
to a person under the age of eighteen (18) years.
(d) For purposes of this section, "child" means a person under the age
of eighteen (18) years.
(e) As used in this section, "childhood sexual abuse" means any act
committed by the defendant against a complainant who was less than
eighteen (18) years of age at the time of the act and which act would
have been a criminal violation of chapter 37 of title 11.
P.L. 1992, ch. 84, § 1; P.L. 1993, ch. 274, § 1.
Commentary:
In Smith v. O'Connell, (D. R.I. 1998 WL 126886 (D.R., Mar 17,
1998) (NO. 93-615-T, 93-660-T, 93-661-T), the Federal Court refused to apply the state's
"unsound mind" exception to the statute of limitations in three cases brought by
victims of clergy abuse, stating that the "unsound mind" exception requires
proof that the claimant was unable to manage everyday affairs. The same
conclusion was reached by the State Supreme Court in
Roe v.
Gelineau,
794 A.2d 476 (R.I.
2002). In Kelly v. Marcantonio,
678 A.2d 873, 877 (R.I.1996), the Supreme Court settled any issues with
respect to the need to bring actions against non-perpetrators under the
3-year statute of limitation, R.I. Gen. Laws §
9-1-14(b).
Resources:
Revised
09/03/2007.
Copyright Susan K. Smith. All rights reserved.
|
