10 Del. C. § 8145

Civil suits for damages based upon sexual abuse of a minor by an adult

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section DE-DELCdelcode.delaware.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) A cause of action based upon the sexual abuse of a minor by an adult may be filed in the Superior Court of this State at any time following the commission of the act or acts that constituted the sexual abuse. A civil cause of action for sexual abuse of a minor shall be based upon sexual acts that would constitute a criminal offense under the Delaware Code.

(b) For a period of 2 years following July 9, 2007, victims of child sexual abuse that occurred in this State who have been barred from filing suit against their abusers by virtue of the expiration of the former civil statute of limitations, shall be permitted to file those claims in the Superior Court of this State. If the person committing the act of sexual abuse against a minor was employed by an institution, agency, firm, business, corporation, or other public or private legal entity that owned a duty of care to the victim, or the accused and the minor were engaged in some activity over which the legal entity had some degree of responsibility or control, damages against the legal entity shall be awarded under this subsection only if there is a finding of gross negligence on the part of the legal entity.

(c) A person against whom a suit is filed may recover attorneys’ fees where the Court determines that a false accusation was made with no basis in fact and with malicious intent. A verdict in favor of the accused shall not be the sole basis for a determination that an accusation was false. The Court must make an independent finding of an improper motive to award attorneys’ fees under this section.

76 Del. Laws, c. 102, § 1; 76 Del. Laws, c. 80, §§ 72, 76; 77 Del. Laws, c. 88, § 1;

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 13 cases (4 in the last 5 years), 2009–2022 · leading case: Hecksher v. Fairwinds Baptist Church, Inc.

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Hecksher v. Fairwinds Baptist Church, Inc. (2015) del · cites it 5× “10 Del. C. § 8145. See, e.g., Wheat v. State, 527 A.”

Sheehan v. Oblates of St. Francis de Sales (2011) del “See 10 Del. C. § 8145(a). . Id. at § 8145(b).”

Elliott v. the Marist Bros. of the Schools, Inc. (2009) ded · cites it 2× “10 Del. C. § 8145(a). The Act retrospectively creates a two-year window within which claims may be brought for past child abuse actions which had been previously barred by the prior statute of limitations.”

Thompson v. ROMAN CATHOLIC ARCHBISHOP OF WASHINGTON (2010) ded “INTRODUCTION The above captioned cases were filed in the Superior Court of the State of Delaware following enactment of the Delaware Child Victim’s Act of 2007, 10 Del. C. § 8145, in which legislation opened a window of opportunity for litigants to assert claims involving…”

McLeod v. McLeod. (2015) delsuperct · cites it 3× “Defendant counterclaims against Plaintiff on two counts: (1) making meritless accusations with malicious intent in violation of 10 Del. C. §8145(c), and (2) libel, slander, and defamation.”

Collins v. Dutton (2019) delsuperct “1110 Del. C. § 8145. 9 The Plaintiffs fail to provide any case law in support of their novel theory that a Title IX claim involving the sexual abuse of a minor has no statute of limitations in Delaware.”

Farnsworth v. Biden (2021) ded “…based the sexual abuse of a minor by an adult may be filed at any time following the commission of the act. See 10 Del. C. § 8145. 5”

Cohen v. Cohen (2022) ded “Indeed, that brief concedes that Count II is not time-barred by stating that 10 Del. C. § 8145’s “unlimited statute of limitations only applies to Plaintiff’s Count II.”

Flowers v. The State of Delaware (2022) ded “…based the sexual abuse of a minor by an adult may be filed at any time following the commission of the act. See 10 Del. C. § 8145.”

Kane v. Mount Pleasant Central School District (2021) nysd “10 Del. C. § 8145. Indeed, the Collins court explicitly found that “[plaintiff]’s assault and battery claims, if legally sustainable against the [school] board through either respondeat superior/vicarious liability, are subject to an unlimited statute of limitations pursuant to…”

Jane Voe 2 Ex Rel. the Estate of Voe v. Archdiocese of Milwaukee (2010) ded “(collectively, “the Firms”), about filing a lawsuit under the Delaware Child Victim’s Act 10 Del. C. § 8145 (the “Act”). (D.I. 34 at ¶ 2) Since the window provided by the Act was set to close on July 9, 2009, the Firms agreed to file the case before the deadline expired to…”

McLeod v. McLeod. (2015) delsuperct “7 Plaintiff suggested that in enacting 10 Del. C. §8145, the Delaware legislature already took into account the expense of providing a remedy to plaintiffs such as himself whose causes of action were previously barred by the statute of limitations.”

Show all 13 citing cases →

— 10 Del. C. § 8145(a) — 2 cases

Sheehan v. Oblates of St. Francis de Sales (2011) del “See 10 Del. C. § 8145(a). . Id. at § 8145(b).”

Elliott v. the Marist Bros. of the Schools, Inc. (2009) ded “10 Del. C. § 8145(a). The Act retrospectively creates a two-year window within which claims may be brought for past child abuse actions which had been previously barred by the prior statute of limitations.”

— 10 Del. C. § 8145(b) — 3 cases

Hecksher v. Fairwinds Baptist Church, Inc. (2015) del “10 Del. C. § 8145. See, e.g., Wheat v. State, 527 A.”

Elliott v. the Marist Bros. of the Schools, Inc. (2009) ded “10 Del. C. § 8145(a). The Act retrospectively creates a two-year window within which claims may be brought for past child abuse actions which had been previously barred by the prior statute of limitations.”

McLeod v. McLeod. (2015) delsuperct

— 10 Del. C. § 8145(c) — 1 case

McLeod v. McLeod. (2015) delsuperct “Defendant counterclaims against Plaintiff on two counts: (1) making meritless accusations with malicious intent in violation of 10 Del. C. §8145(c), and (2) libel, slander, and defamation.”

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.