Article: Remedies
for Victims of Sexual Abuse
Article: Connecticut version of Remedies article
Legal Resources
for Victims of Sexual Abuse
|
Susan K. Smith
David M. Moore
Attorneys at Law
Mediation, Collaboration
Victims' Remedies
Injury Cases
Smith & Moore, LLC
www.SmithMooreLLC.com
www.smith-lawfirm.com
suesmith@smith-lawfirm.com
24 East Main Street
(Route 44)
Old Avon Village North
Avon, CT 06001
Direct dial:
Atty Smith: (860) 678-1860
Atty. Moore: (860) 674-0122
Fax: (860) 677-5229
Directions & Map
Atty. Smith's Hartford
Conference Space
21 Oak Street
Suite 208
Hartford, CT 06106
Voice: (860) 297-0035
Directions & Map
Martindale-Hubbell
Peer Review Rated
For Ethical Standards and Legal Ability
|
|
The Fine Print: This
web site provides general information only and cannot be relied upon as legal advice. Laws
change and differ from State to State. Applicability of the legal principles
discussed may differ substantially in individual situations. You should consult an
attorney about your particular situation.
COPYRIGHT ©
1998-07 Susan K. Smith All Rights Reserved. Search
Site Map |
|
Statutes of Limitations
for Child Sexual Abuse
West Virginia |
| W. Va. Code §55-2-15. |
West Virginia
has not adopted any special bright-line rules for childhood sexual abuse
(CSA) cases. A victim who was a minor at the time of the
sexual abuse, must file: 1) within two years he/she has
attained age of majority and 2) within twenty years of date of wrongful
act and injury.
Discovery and disability rule applies to all injury claims.
The victim must demonstrate he or she was prevented from knowing of the
claim at the time of the injury by reason of fraudulent concealment,
inability to comprehend the injury, or other extreme hardship. Cart v.
Marcum, 188 W.Va. 241, 423 S.E.2d 644 (1992). In Miller v. Mongolia
County Bd. of Ed., 210 W. Va. 147, 556 S.E.2d 427 (2001), the State
Supreme Court held that a cover-up by Board of Education was
sufficient to trigger the fraudulent concealment exception.
The West Virginia courts have applied the discovery rule set forth in
Gaither v. City Hospital to sexual abuse claims advanced under a
discovery analysis. The Court Gaither Court ruled that
[i]n tort actions, unless there is a clear statutory prohibition to
its application, under the discovery rule the statute of limitations
begins to run when the plaintiff knows, or by the exercise of
reasonable diligence, should know (1) that the plaintiff has been
injured, (2) the identity of the entity who owed the plaintiff a
duty to act with due care, and who may have engaged in conduct that
breached that duty, and (3) that the conduct of that entity has a
causal relation to the injury.
199 W.Va. 706, 487 S.E.2d 901 (1997). Merrill v. West
Virginia Dept. of Health and Human Resources, slip op. 2006 W.Va.
(32856) (Jan. 2006).
The
discovery statute cannot be used to extend the 20-year statute
of repose. Albright v. White, 202 W. Va. 292, 503 S.E.2d 860 (1998); Donley v. Bracken,
192 W. Va. 383, 387, 452 S.E.2d 699, 703 (1994).
Link to West Virginia
Legislature's web site. |
| Last revision to this
page |
August 25, 2007 |
|
