In 2019, Gov. Gavin Newsom signed Assembly Bill 218, expanding the ability to file civil lawsuits over childhood sexual assault claims. Authored by then-Assemblymember Lorena Gonzalez, AB 218 extended filing deadlines to age 40 (or within five years of discovering the injury), broadened the legal scope of abuse, and created a three-year lookback window that revived expired claims.
Few would dispute the premise of the bill that individuals subject to childhood sexual abuse should be entitled to seek justice. But AB 218, as written, seemed less about justice and more like an opportunity for trial lawyers to cash in on righteous public indignation. With the passage of time eroding evidence one way or another, the natural bias in favor of those who assert they have been victimized, expanded liability, and the absence of any caps on public entity payouts, trial lawyers have been highly incentivized to target taxpayer-backed entities.
At the time AB 218 was being debated, a coalition including the Association of California School Administrators, the California Association of Joint Powers Authorities, and the California Association of School Business Officials warned lawmakers that the bill opened the door to a flood of unrestrained litigation.
“As drafted, AB 218 exposes local public schools and others to claims of abuse going back 40 years ago and longer,” the coalition wrote at the time. “It will be impossible for employers to effectively defend against these claims when evidence is likely gone, witnesses have moved or passed away, and there has been a turnover of staff. With these barriers, schools will be unable to adequately respond to these claims.”
Fast forward to today and it’s apparent those warnings have borne out and then some. School districts like Los Angeles Unified and many others have faced claims at considerable cost. LAUSD alone had to issue $500 million in bonds last summer to pay off some of its AB 218 obligations.
Needless to say, this is not sustainable and poses an ongoing risk to the fiscal state of public, meaning taxpayer-funded, entities.
Even more staggering is the $4 billion settlement announced by Los Angeles County last year over AB 218 claims in the county’s foster and justice systems. According to Supervisor Kathryn Barger, “an exorbitant $1.5 billion” of that “will go directly to attorneys’ fees.” Given the thousands of individual claims dating as far back as 1959, the county was in no position to contest every claim, true or not, and settled to cut its losses. Shortly after, the Los Angeles Times surfaced evidence of fraudulent claims and instances of people claiming they were paid to “fabricate stories of abuse” against the county, prompting an investigation by the Los Angeles County District Attorney’s Office.
Reform efforts have fallen short due to the understandable reluctance of lawmakers to look like they don’t have the backs of abuse victims. But now, a coalition of local government groups, including many of those originally opposed to AB 218, has been working with legislative leadership to impose reasonable limits on AB 218 claims. This includes common-sense caps on damages as seen in other Democratic states, proportional liability “so that taxpayers pay only for the share of harm actually attributable to the public agency,” and heightened evidentiary and procedural standards.
These reforms, if enacted, ensure access to justice for real victims, while slowing the gravy train for trial lawyers and reducing harm to taxpayers.
As the coalition backing reforms notes, “In many individual cases, attorney fees approach 50 percent of the taxpayer-funded settlement or award. That means that for every $10 million paid by a city, county, JPA, or school district, as much as $4 to $5 million is paid to a private law firm. It does not go to the survivor, nor does it go to mental health services, prevention or victim assistance, or back to the taxpayers who funded the payment.”
Enough is enough. It’s time to impose common sense on the perhaps well-intended AB 218 and ensure justice is actually done.