Last week, the Appellate Division issued an opinion clarifying the application of the 2019 amendment to the Child Sexual Assault Act (CSAA), giving an expansive reading of the statute. The New Jersey State Bar Association took part as amicus curiae in the matter of J.H. v. Warren Hills Board of Education in support of an expansive reading of the statute to include all civil claims, including common law claims, for damages resulting from sexual assault and abuse. NJSBA Secretary Craig J. Hubert and Trustee Thomas J. Manzo wrote the brief. Manzo argued the matter before the Appellate Division.
In 2019, the Legislature amended the Tort Claims Act (TCA) and the CSAA to “increase the availability of victims of sexual abuse to pursue justice through the court system.” Those amendments effectively extended the statutes of limitations for filing civil claims of sexual abuse and did away with the notice provisions of the TCA. They also eliminated the requirement that a passive sexual abuser be “within the household” of the victim.
Opining largely on the statutory interpretation of a 2019 amendment to the TCA and the CSAA, the Appellate Division held that the plain language, intent of the amendment and the legislative history pointed to the more expansive reading. This holding is consistent with an earlier holding in W.S. v. Hildreth where the Supreme Court held that the plain meaning of the TCA dictated that child sexual abuse survivors who file a CSAA complaint against a public entity after Dec. 1, 2019 (the effective date of the amendment) – even if their cause of action accrued earlier – need not file a TCA notice of claim before filing a claim. The NJSBA also took part as amicus in W.S. in support of the Supreme Court’s holding.
In J.H., the plaintiff sued the Board alleging sexual abuse almost 50 years ago when the plaintiff was a student at the high school. The plaintiff asserted claims under the CSAA and common law claims of negligence, including negligent hiring of the custodian accused of sexual abuse who worked for the school. The Board argued the common law claims were barred by the TCA due to lack of timely notice of those claims. Additionally, the Board also argued that under the CSAA, the Board was not a passive abuser because it was not a member of the plaintiff’s household.
The NJSBA argued that in enacting the 2019 amendments, “the Legislature and the Governor intended to eliminate obstacles faced by victims of sexual assault in seeking civil redress for the harm they suffered.” Consistent with the Appellate Division’s decision, the NJSBA’s argument that “[d]ismissing the common law claims of victims of sexual assault and abuse based on pre-amendment requirements would deviate from the statutory language, the legislative intent and the recent precedent of our state’s highest court.”