537.046. Childhood sexual abuse, injury or illness defined — action for damages may be brought, when — nondisclosure agreements unenforceable, when. — 1. As used in this section, the following terms mean:
(1) "Childhood sexual abuse", any act committed by the defendant against the plaintiff which act occurred when the plaintiff was under the age of eighteen years and which act would have been a violation of section 566.030, 566.031, 566.032, 566.034, 566.060, 566.061, 566.062, 566.064, 566.067, 566.068, 566.069, 566.071, 566.083, 566.086, 566.093, 566.095, 566.100, 566.101, 566.209, 566.210, 566.211, 568.020, or 573.200;
(2) "Injury" or "illness", either a physical injury or illness or a psychological injury or illness. A psychological injury or illness need not be accompanied by physical injury or illness.
2. Any action to recover damages from injury or illness caused by childhood sexual abuse in an action brought pursuant to this section shall be commenced within ten years of the plaintiff attaining the age of twenty-one or within three years of the date the plaintiff discovers, or reasonably should have discovered, that the injury or illness was caused by childhood sexual abuse, whichever later occurs.
3. This section shall apply to any action arising on or after August 28, 2025.
4. Notwithstanding any other provision of law to the contrary, a nondisclosure agreement by any party to a childhood sexual abuse action shall not be judicially enforceable in a dispute involving childhood sexual abuse allegations or claims, and shall be void.
Notes of Decisions
Powel v. Chaminade Coll. Preparatory, Inc., 197 S.W.3d 576 (Mo. 2006).
· cites it 16× “The general assembly enacted a discovery standard for child sexual abuse cases in 1990 in section 537.046. [5] Presumably this statute was enacted because the legislature believed one was needed.”
Doe v. Roman Catholic Diocese of Jefferson City, 862 S.W.2d 338 (Mo. 1993).
· cites it 23× “The sole issue is the constitutionality of the childhood sexual abuse statute, § 537.046, RSMo Supp.1992, to the extent that it authorizes causes of action that are barred under statutes of limitation applicable prior to August 28, 1990, the effective date of the statute.”
John Doe, 414 v. Father Shawn Ratigan, 481 S.W.3d 36 (Mo. Ct. App. 2015).
· cites it 36× “Count II asserted a violation of section 537.046. 6 Count IV asserted a violation of section 537.”
Harris v. Hollingsworth, 150 S.W.3d 85 (Mo. Ct. App. 2004).
· cites it 44× “Section 537.046, after defining the terms "childhood sexual abuse" and "injury or illness," provides as follows: In any civil action for recovery of damages suffered as a result of childhood sexual abuse, the time for commencement of the action shall be within five years of the…”
Straub v. Tull, 128 S.W.3d 157 (Mo. Ct. App. 2004).
· cites it 26× “In her petition, Respondent specifically sought relief for battery, intentional infliction of emotional distress, negligent infliction of emotional distress, loss of consortium by her husband, Martin Straub, and “childhood sexual abuse” as set out in section 537.046, RSMo…”
Graham v. McGrath, 243 S.W.3d 459 (Mo. Ct. App. 2007).
· cites it 17× “See Section 537.046 RSMo Cum.Supp.2004. The version of Section 537.”
Ridder v. Hibsch, 94 S.W.3d 470 (Mo. Ct. App. 2003).
· cites it 18× “However, there is precedent for allowing such causes of action to be brought within another statute of limitations, § 537.046, RSMo Supp.1999, so long as the statutes of limitations for the tort causes of action had not expired prior to the effective date of § 537.”
Vandenheuvel v. Sowell, 886 S.W.2d 100 (Mo. Ct. App. 1994).
· cites it 7× “In view of the ruling of the court that § 537.046 cannot be applied retrospectively to revive a cause of action which had already been extinguished, plaintiff cannot avoid dismissal of her claim in this case unless her cause of action remained potentially viable at the time the…”
Swartz v. Swartz, 887 S.W.2d 644 (Mo. Ct. App. 1994).
· cites it 12× “Second, it is argued that § 537.046, RSMo Cum.Supp.1993, bars Judith Swartz’s claim.”
A.R.B. v. Elkin, 98 S.W.3d 99 (Mo. Ct. App. 2003).
· cites it 3× “It is unclear from the pleadings whether any statutory claim for damages was made pursuant to Section 537.046 RSMo.2000. We note, however, that psychological injury claims for childhood sexual abuse under this statute do not require proof of a physical injury or illness.”
S.H. v. James R. Cannon, 504 S.W.3d 817 (Mo. Ct. App. 2016).
· cites it 10× “filed an action against Cannon for damages for childhood sexual abuse under Section 537.046. In her petition, S.H. alleged that Cannon began grooming her for sex in 1996, when she was 11 years old.”
— Mo. Rev. Stat. § 537.046(1) — 1 case
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.