The childhood sexual abuse statute of limitations in California, explained plainly

If you were sexually abused as a child, you may have been told it is too late to do anything about it. Often that is not true. The childhood sexual abuse statute of limitations in California is long, and for abuse that happened on or after January 1, 2024, there is no time limit at all.

This guide explains, in plain terms, which deadline applies to you, what changed under AB 218 and AB 452, what happens if you are over 40, the extra damages available when abuse was covered up, and the special rules for claims against public schools and other government bodies, including a 2026 law that changes how some older claims are proven. It is general information as of October 2026, not advice about your case.

Key facts at a glance

Statute	Code of Civil Procedure § 340.1
Abuse on or after Jan. 1, 2024	No time limit (AB 452, 2023)
Abuse on or before Dec. 31, 2023	Until age 40, or five years from discovering the injury, whichever is later (the rule in effect on Dec. 31, 2023)
Revival window	AB 218 window, Jan. 1, 2020 to Dec. 31, 2022 (closed)
Survivors 40 or older	Certificates of merit required before defendants are served
Cover-up	Up to treble damages, but not against public entities
Public entities	No government claim required (Gov. Code § 905(m))

What is the statute of limitations for childhood sexual abuse in California?

The answer turns on one date: when the abuse happened.

Abuse on or after January 1, 2024: no deadline

AB 452 (Chapter 655 of the Statutes of 2023) amended § 340.1 so that there is "no time limit" to sue over childhood sexual assault. Under subdivision (p), that rule applies to assaults on or after January 1, 2024. It covers claims against the person who committed the abuse, against anyone who owed the child a duty of care and whose negligence was a legal cause of the abuse, and against anyone whose intentional act was a legal cause.

Abuse on or before December 31, 2023: age 40 or five years from discovery

Subdivision (p) also says claims based on abuse on or before December 31, 2023 may be brought only under the statute of limitations in effect on that date. That earlier version of § 340.1, as shown in the 2022 code text, gives the later of:

• 22 years after turning 18, which means before your 40th birthday, or
• five years from the date you discovered, or reasonably should have discovered, that a psychological injury or illness occurring after age 18 was caused by the abuse.

The discovery rule matters. Many survivors do not connect depression, anxiety, addiction or relationship problems to childhood abuse until years later, often in therapy. The five-year clock generally starts then, not when the abuse happened.

One more rule applies to older claims against institutions. In that version, claims against a third party such as a school, church or youth program could not be filed on or after age 40 unless the organization knew or had reason to know of misconduct that created a risk of abuse, or failed to take reasonable steps or safeguards to prevent it. The statute added that counseling alone is not a reasonable step or safeguard.

What was the AB 218 window, and is it still open?

AB 218, signed October 13, 2019 as Chapter 861 of the Statutes of 2019, made three big changes. It raised the deadline from age 26 to age 40, lengthened the discovery period from three years to five, and opened a three-year revival window for claims that were already time-barred. That window ran from January 1, 2020 to December 31, 2022. It is closed.

If you missed that window, you may still be within the age-40 or five-year discovery rule. Many survivors in their 30s, or who only recently understood the harm, can still file.

I am over 40. Can I still sue?

Possibly, through the five-year discovery rule, and for third-party claims if the institution knew or should have known of the risk. Survivors who are 40 or older when they file must meet an extra step. Under the current text of § 340.1, subdivisions (e) through (h), the survivor's lawyer files a certificate of merit for each defendant. The attorney certifies that they reviewed the facts, consulted at least one licensed mental health practitioner, and concluded there is reasonable and meritorious cause to file. A separate licensed mental health practitioner, chosen by the survivor and not a party to the case, certifies a reasonable basis to believe the survivor was abused as a child.

The court reviews these certificates privately before any defendant can be served. Under subdivisions (k) through (n), defendants are also named only as "Doe" until the court finds a corroborative fact, and that certificate stays sealed. The process protects both sides from an unfounded public accusation, and it takes time to prepare, so start early.

What if the abuse was covered up?

Section 340.1(b) lets a survivor who proves the abuse resulted from a cover-up recover "up to treble damages" from a defendant found to have covered it up, "unless prohibited by another law." A cover-up is "a concerted effort to hide evidence relating to childhood sexual assault." That can include moving an abuser quietly, destroying complaints or pressuring families to stay silent.

There is an important limit. In Los Angeles Unified School District v. Superior Court, decided June 1, 2023, the California Supreme Court held that these enhanced damages are punitive in nature, so Government Code § 818 bars them against public entities such as school districts. Treble damages remain available against private institutions.

Suing a public school, county or other government entity

Most claims against California public entities require a written government claim within six months (Government Code § 911.2). Childhood sexual assault is an exception. Government Code § 905(m) excludes claims under § 340.1 for damages from childhood sexual assault, and § 340.1(q) says these claims need not be presented to a government entity before suit. Adult survivors abused as children by a teacher, coach, foster placement or juvenile facility staff member can sue directly, within the § 340.1 deadlines.

The challenge to revived claims against public entities

Some school districts argued that AB 218 was unconstitutional because it revived old claims against public entities that had never been presented under the claims process, which the districts called a "gift" of public funds. In West Contra Costa Unified School District v. Superior Court, decided July 31, 2024, the First District Court of Appeal rejected that argument. According to a California School Boards Association report, the court held that the bill "simply waived a condition the state had imposed on its consent to suit," and the California Supreme Court declined review on October 30, 2024. The denial left the ruling in place. The CSBA report also noted that trial judges had split on the question in other cases, so defendants may keep raising it.

SB 577 (2026): new proof rules for some older claims

In 2026 the Legislature passed SB 577, a compromise over the cost of these claims to schools and local governments. As passed on August 30, 2026, CalMatters reported that it requires survivors over 40, and survivors with pre-2024 claims where records were destroyed, to show by "clear and convincing" evidence that the entity had "actual knowledge" of the abuse. It does not cap damages, and it fines attorneys $25,000 for claims brought "in bad faith." The Daily Journal has reported that Governor Newsom signed it. Its effective date and how it applies to pending cases should be checked with a lawyer, because the details matter for anyone with an older claim against a public entity.

Federal claims

Some survivors also have federal claims, such as Title IX claims against schools that receive federal funds, or civil-rights claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against public employees. Federal claims have their own deadlines, which are generally much shorter than § 340.1. A lawyer can tell you whether a federal claim adds anything to your state case.

What to do now

1. Write down what you remember: places, dates or school years, the people in charge, and anyone you told. Approximate is fine.
2. Note when you first connected the abuse to the harm, such as a therapy session or a diagnosis. That date may control the five-year discovery period.
3. Keep records you already have: yearbooks, letters, report cards, messages and medical or therapy records.
4. Do not contact the institution or sign anything it sends you before talking to a lawyer.
5. Get a confidential review early, especially if you are near 40 or the defendant is a public entity.

If you were assaulted as an adult rather than a child, a different law applies; see our guide to the AB 2777 adult sexual assault deadline.

How LaCour helps survivors

LaCour Trial Lawyers represents survivors of abuse by clergy, school staff, coaches and camp counselors and foster and group home staff across California. You can file as Jane or John Doe, you set the pace, and we have Spanish-speaking lawyers and staff. There is no fee unless there is a recovery. Learn more about our institutional sexual abuse practice or request a free, confidential review.

Frequently asked questions

This guide is general information about California and federal law and about public records as of its date. It is not legal advice, and reading it or contacting us does not create an attorney–client relationship. Allegations in lawsuits are claims, not findings. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Attorney advertising.