California 2025-2026 Regular Session

California Assembly Bill AB250

Introduced
1/15/25  
Refer
2/10/25  
Report Pass
3/11/25  
Refer
3/11/25  
Refer
4/9/25  
Report Pass
5/23/25  
Engrossed
5/29/25  
Refer
5/29/25  
Refer
6/11/25  
Report Pass
7/2/25  
Refer
7/2/25  
Refer
7/14/25  
Report Pass
8/29/25  
Enrolled
9/10/25  

Caption

Sexual assault: statute of limitations.

Impact

The bill’s impact on state laws is significant as it allows survivors of sexual assault to come forward even years after their assault, particularly in instances where entities may have covered up these actions. The amendment would permit claims to be revived if they demonstrate that one or more entities were responsible for the assault and engaged in an effort to hide previous instances. While this law could offer more avenues for survivors to seek justice, it also raises questions about the burden of proof involved in such claims.

Summary

Assembly Bill 250, introduced by Assembly Member Aguiar-Curry, seeks to amend Section 340.16 of the Code of Civil Procedure concerning the statute of limitations for civil claims related to sexual assault. This bill extends the eligibility period for reviving certain claims that would otherwise be barred by the expiration of the statute of limitations. Specifically, it enables claims that occurred after the victim's 18th birthday to be revived if they could not have been filed because the statute of limitations had expired prior to January 1, 2026.

Sentiment

Overall sentiment surrounding AB 250 appears to be mixed. Advocacy groups and survivors' rights organizations largely support the bill for facilitating justice and accountability for victims of sexual assault. However, there may be concerns from certain legal experts and institutions regarding the implications of extending revival periods, including potential for an influx of older cases that could be challenging to litigate due to the fading memories and lost evidence over time.

Contention

Notable points of contention include the provision that would exempt public entities from being required to indemnify perpetrators of sexual assault. This raises questions surrounding accountability, as critics may argue that this aspect could shield entities from responsibility in cases where a cover-up is alleged. Additionally, the law preserves the ability for multiple claims based on the same incident, posing potential complications in judicial processes and equitable recovery for victims.

Companion Bills

No companion bills found.

Previously Filed As

CA AB2587

Sexual assault: statute of limitations.

CA AB452

Childhood sexual assault: statute of limitations.

CA AB1547

Childhood sexual assault: statute of limitations.

CA AB2693

Childhood sexual assault: statute of limitations.

CA SB558

Civil actions: childhood sexual abuse.

CA SB898

Criminal procedure: sexual assault resentencing.

CA AB2843

Health care coverage: rape and sexual assault.

CA SB1386

Evidence: sexual assault.

CA AB1368

Sexual assault forensic evidence: testing.

CA AB933

Privileged communications: incident of sexual assault, harassment, or discrimination.

Similar Bills

CA AB2587

Sexual assault: statute of limitations.

CA AB2777

Sexual assault: statute of limitations.

CA AB1455

Sexual assault by law enforcement officers: actions against public entities: statute of limitations.

CA AB3092

Sexual assault and other sexual misconduct: statutes of limitations on civil actions.

CA AB1510

Sexual assault and other sexual misconduct: statutes of limitations on civil actions.