## Facts

- Three brothers alleged that, as young children, juvenile authorities placed them in the home of their uncle by marriage, who became their foster parent and custodian.
- The brothers alleged that, from about 1966 to 1968, the foster parent repeatedly sexually molested them, including genital fondling and oral and anal intercourse.
- The complaint alleged the abuse was against their will, was concealed from other adults, and was enforced through secrecy and threats.
- The brothers alleged the abuse caused long-term psychological effects, including repression, denial, dissociation, shame, fear, and self-blame, which prevented them from recognizing the wrongfulness of the acts and the causal connection to later injuries until adulthood.
- They sued for damages decades later; defendants demurred on statute-of-limitations grounds under Code of Civil Procedure § 340.1 (as then in effect).

## Issues

1. In civil actions for childhood sexual abuse by a parent or parental figure, when does the cause of action accrue for limitations purposes under § 340.1: at the time of the acts, or upon later discovery of the acts and their wrongfulness (and related causation)?
2. Whether the plaintiffs’ pleading was sufficient to invoke delayed accrual at the demurrer stage.
3. Whether the trial court abused its discretion by sustaining the demurrer without leave to amend.

## Decision

- The Court of Appeal reversed the dismissal.
- The court held that a civil action based on a parent or parental figure’s sexual abuse of a child does not accrue until the plaintiff discovers, or reasonably should discover, both the acts of molestation and the wrongfulness of the conduct.
- The court agreed the second amended complaint, as pleaded, lacked sufficient specificity to defeat the limitations defense.
- The court concluded there was a reasonable possibility plaintiffs could amend to plead specific facts showing timely discovery; denying leave to amend was an abuse of discretion.
- The matter was remanded with directions to grant leave to amend.

## Legal Principles

- On demurrer, the court accepts properly pleaded factual allegations as true and tests only legal sufficiency.
- Leave to amend must be granted if there is a reasonable possibility the plaintiff can state a viable claim; refusal is reversible abuse of discretion in that circumstance.
- In childhood sexual abuse cases involving a parent or parental figure, delayed discovery may postpone accrual where psychological effects plausibly prevent recognition of the abuse’s wrongfulness and its causal connection to later harm.
- To plead delayed discovery, a plaintiff must allege facts showing when and how discovery occurred and why earlier discovery was not reasonable, including the link between the abuse and the claimed injuries.

## Conclusion

The court recognized delayed accrual for intra-familial or custodial child sexual abuse claims until the victim discovers (or should discover) the abuse and its wrongfulness, and it required an opportunity to amend where more specific delayed-discovery allegations might bring the action within the applicable limitations period.


Evans v. Eckelman, 216 Cal. App. 3d 1609, 265 Cal. Rptr. 605 (Cal. Ct. App. 1990)