12-514. Civil action arising from sexual conduct or sexual contact committed against a minor; failure to report; statute of limitations; definitions
A. Notwithstanding sections 12-505, 12-511 and 12-542, an action for the recovery of damages that is based on either of the following shall be commenced within twelve years after the plaintiff reaches eighteen years of age and not afterward:
1. An injury that a minor suffers as a result of another person's negligent or intentional act if that act is a cause of sexual conduct or sexual contact committed against the minor.
2. The failure to report pursuant to section 13-3620 sexual conduct or sexual contact committed against a minor.
B. For the purposes of this section:
1. "Person" means an individual, the United States, this state or a public or private corporation, local government unit, public agency, partnership, association, firm, trust or estate or any other legal entity.
2. "Sexual conduct" means sexual conduct as proscribed by section 13-1405.
3. "Sexual contact" has the same meaning prescribed in section 13-1401.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
8
cases (
7 in the last 5 years), 2020–2025 · leading case:
Boyd v. State, 540 P.3d 1228 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2023).
Boyd v. State, 540 P.3d 1228 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2023).
· cites it 12× “¶4 In August 2021, Loe moved to dismiss Boyd’s claims, asserting they were barred by A.R.S. § 12-514, which states that an action for damages based on injuries due to sexual conduct or contact committed against a minor must be filed within 12 years after the victim turns 18.”
Campbell v. Arizona, State of (D. Ariz. 2022).
· cites it 14× “) The State 12 argues, among other things, Plaintiffs Mahliya and Alec’s state-law claims are untimely 13 and barred by the notice-of-claim statute, irrespective of A.R.S. § 12-514, and the statute 14 of limitations.”
Hogen v. Hogen (Ariz. Ct. App. 2025).
· cites it 8× “See A.R.S. § 12-514(A). ¶3 When Son did not timely respond, the superior court granted Father’s motion to dismiss.”
Doe v. Arizona Bd. of Regents (Ariz. Ct. App. 2022).
· cites it 2× “) (codified, in part, at A.R.S. § 12-514). 3 DOE v. ARIZONA BOARD OF REGENTS, et al.”
Franco v. Mesa Pub. Schs. (D. Ariz. 2020).
· cites it 2× “But Plaintiff argues that the appropriate statute of limitations for her federal 27 claims is actually twelve years because of A.R.S. § 12-514, which overrides the two-year 28 limit in cases where a minor suffered an injury from another’s sexual misconduct.”
Doe v. Byzantine Catholic Diocese of Parma (D. Ariz. 2024).
· cites it 2× “55-1, 55-2); 10 A.R.S. § 12-514 (2019). The statute allows the victim to file an otherwise-expired claim 11 against the perpetrator of sexual abuse, as well as against a non-perpetrator if the victim 12 can show by clear and convincing evidence that the non-perpetrator “knew or…”
Doe v. Iglesia (Ariz. Ct. App. 2024).
“”) § 12-514). ¶3 Doe alleged that Serrano abused her from ages 13 to 17.”
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 12-514(A) — 1 case
Hogen v. Hogen (Ariz. Ct. App. 2025).
“See A.R.S. § 12-514(A). ¶3 When Son did not timely respond, the superior court granted Father’s motion to dismiss.”
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 12-514(A)(1) — 1 case
Hogen v. Hogen (Ariz. Ct. App. 2025).
“See A.R.S. § 12-514(A). ¶3 When Son did not timely respond, the superior court granted Father’s motion to dismiss.”
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 12-514(B)(1) — 1 case
Boyd v. State, 540 P.3d 1228 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2023).
“¶4 In August 2021, Loe moved to dismiss Boyd’s claims, asserting they were barred by A.R.S. § 12-514, which states that an action for damages based on injuries due to sexual conduct or contact committed against a minor must be filed within 12 years after the victim turns 18.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.