RALEIGH, N.C. — The Supreme Court of North Carolina upheld a legislative measure on Friday that grants adult survivors of child sexual abuse an additional two years to pursue civil claims for damages. This decision comes despite objections that the temporary extension undermines constitutional rights for individuals facing claims that, under normal circumstances, could no longer be filed in court.
The ruling emerged from a case involving a local school board and three former students who sought damages years after a former high school coach was found guilty of sex crimes against members of the team. The state’s highest court affirmed that the General Assembly acted within its authority when it introduced a notable provision in the 2019 SAFE Child Act, which was also endorsed by then-Governor Roy Cooper.
Prior to this law, victims of child sexual abuse could file civil claims until they reached the age of 21, but now those affected have until they turn 28 to initiate action. The central issue addressed by the court in the Gaston County case was a provision allowing other victims, whose opportunity to sue had expired, to file valid lawsuits for damages between January 2020 and December 2021.
Proponents of this provision argued that it gives victims an opportunity for accountability against both their perpetrators and the institutions that allowed the abuse to take place. The litigation window reportedly led to at least 250 lawsuits related to child sexual abuse being filed in North Carolina during this temporary interval.
In a previous ruling, a divided panel of the North Carolina Court of Appeals in 2023 had already deemed the two-year window constitutional. The attorney representing the school board contended that this lookback period infringed on North Carolina’s Constitution by eliminating fundamental rights that should not be altered retroactively by the legislature. He warned that upholding this litigation window could hinder effective defenses due to the time elapsed and the loss of records.
Chief Justice Paul Newby, who authored the majority opinion, examined earlier versions of the state constitution, noting that current clauses surrounding “retrospective laws” apply solely to retroactive criminal laws and specific tax issues. He was also clear that provisions related to “vested rights” do not pertain to this instance.
Newby stated, “Our precedents affirm that the General Assembly may retroactively amend the statute of limitations for tort claims,” which relates to civil actions taken to seek monetary compensation for harm caused by another party.
The convicted coach, Gary Scott Goins, was sentenced to at least 34 years in prison after being found guilty of 17 sex-related offenses in 2014. The former student-athletes filed suit against Goins and the Gaston County Board of Education in 2020, claiming he sexually assaulted them multiple times. Goins has since been dismissed from the ongoing lawsuit, according to court records.
State attorneys have been working to defend the 2019 law in court, with both Attorney General Jeff Jackson and his predecessor, now-Governor Josh Stein, expressing their approval of the recent ruling.
Since 2002, around 30 states, along with the District of Columbia, have reinstated expired child sexual abuse claims by extending claim periods, according to CHILD USA, an organization that advocates for children’s rights.
Associate Justice Allison Riggs did not participate in Friday’s case, having authored the 2023 Court of Appeals opinion while serving on the lower court. The Supreme Court ultimately upheld that ruling.
Additionally, Associate Justice Anita Earls wrote a separate opinion that, while endorsing the decision, criticized the majority for its constitutional interpretation methodology. Earls and Riggs are the only Democrats on the seven-member court.
Despite the differences in interpretation, Earls commented that “all justices would agree that the political branches may enact remedial legislation that allows survivors of child sexual abuse to seek recovery for the harms suffered from their abusers and those who facilitated the abuse through civil litigation of claims that would otherwise be barred by prior statute limitations.”
The case was part of a larger set of five cases involving the SAFE Child Act that had oral arguments presented to the Supreme Court in September. On the same day, the court settled three other matters concerning the Act.
In one case, the court determined that the law’s wording did permit claims to be filed against both offenders and any institutions associated with them during the two-year period. This case was related to allegations against a Catholic layperson from the 1980s, where a lower trial judge had previously ruled that only the alleged abuser could be sued. The Supreme Court’s ruling aligned with the Court of Appeals in reversing that previous decision. Riggs also chose not to partake in this particular matter.
