|
4180 REVIEW DENIED An amendment to the statute of limitations on actions for childhood sexual abuse that revives for a one year period actions that otherwise would be time-barred against a defendant whose intentional act or breach of a duty of care to plaintiff was a legal cause of childhood sexual abuse does not revive actions against the perpetrator of the abuse, but is targeted at third party defendants who, by virtue of being the perpetrator's employer or principal, could have used safeguards to prevent the sexual assault, under circumstances in which the child's exposure to the perpetrator resulted from the environment created by such a relationship.
AARONOFF v MARTINEZ-SENFTNER (Childhood Sexual Abuse) 136 CA4 910 [See: CCP 340.1; People v Johnson 28 C4 240]
|
|