Should There Be A Statute of Limitations For Certain Sexual Abuse Cases?

I recently wrote about a sexual abuse cover-up decades old within the Boy Scouts of America.  Ultimately the victim in that case was awarded sizeable punitive damages award based on the negligence of the organization and the emotional damage it has caused him even years later.

That leads to the point of this blog and a recent article in the New York Times….should the statute of limitations for certain sexual abuse cases be suspended?  More specifically, the article looks at whether victims of sexual abuse from a public school teacher, a doctor or hospital attendant or doctor, police officer, or other civil servant should be able to file suit decades after the abuse occurred.

The current bill in New York would allow for cases to be brought similar to those much publicized Catholic Church cases, many of which date back to the 1970’s.

Statute of limitations, in effect, set the maximum deadline that a case can be filed.  The time limit depends on the state, the circumstances and complexity of the claim, and the court in which the claim is brought.  Even the IRS is held to a 10-year statute of limitations for tax collections!  Although it can seem unfair that a plaintiff with a valid claim and damages would be barred from bringing a suit after a certain period of time, below are the reasons behind imposing such a limit:

(1)Fairness- there is the notion that people need to get on with their life and after a certain amount of time, they should not worry about a lawsuit.

(2)The diminishing value of evidence- the best cases are brought as close as possible to when the injury occurred.  There is a major concern that important evidence will be lost or fade over time.

(3)Encouraging diligence on the part of the plaintiff in bringing the case- the rationale behind this is to help encourage an efficient closure to the case.

In general, the law recognizes two types of special circumstances which would make the application of the statute of limitations unfair. The first is where the plaintiff may be under a disability, making it difficult for the plaintiff to bring an action within the required time period. The plaintiff can be too young, disabled, or imprisoned. The second, and more common one, is where the plaintiff is unaware of the cause of action and the operation of the statute without some exception would impose an unfair hardship.  Expanding the category of special circumstances to allow for classes of sexual abuse cases could pose a major drain on the court and tax payers.

The main purpose behind statute of limitations is to be fair to a defendant and encourage efficiency on the part of the plaintiff.  Sexual abuse is a tragedy; it can physically and emotionally scar a victim for the rest of his life. That being said, they should have a chance to bring their case and recover when possible, but the potential problem with these types of cases will be with the evidence.  How can you persuasively prove a sexual abuse case when so much time has passed and witnesses have died?  I think that if these cases have similarities between those of the Catholic Church, then there has been a cover up, rather than a statute of limitations, that is the true cause of the delayed case.