For years, many survivors of sexual assault in California watched the legal clock run out before they could act. The trauma of the assault, the fear of retaliation, and in many cases the active concealment of what happened by employers, institutions, or perpetrators kept victims silent long past the standard filing deadlines. California’s legislature has now responded directly to that reality.
Assembly Bill 250, known as the Justice for Survivors of Sexual Assault Act, took effect on January 1, 2026. It creates a limited window, open through December 31, 2027, for survivors to bring civil claims that would otherwise be barred by expired statutes of limitations, provided the case involves a cover-up by the perpetrator or a responsible entity. This is a significant development in California personal injury law, and if it applies to your situation, the time to evaluate your options is now.
What AB 250 Actually Does
California’s standard statute of limitations for personal injury claims is two years from the date of injury under Code of Civil Procedure section 335.1. For sexual assault, California already had extended deadlines under Code of Civil Procedure section 340.16, which generally allows survivors until age 40 or five years from the date they discovered a connection between their injury and the assault, whichever is later. AB 250 goes further by targeting a specific category of cases: those where a cover-up prevented the survivor from coming forward or pursuing a claim within the normal window.
The bill defines a cover-up broadly enough to include institutional concealment, not just individual perpetrators hiding their conduct. If an employer, school, religious organization, healthcare provider, or other entity took steps to suppress, conceal, or discourage disclosure of the assault, that conduct can trigger AB 250’s revival window. Survivors who were wrongfully terminated after reporting an assault may also have claims under this framework, since the termination itself can be part of the pattern of concealment.
The revival window closes on December 31, 2027. Claims that qualify must be filed, or at minimum be in active legal process, before that date. There is no indication the legislature intends to extend this deadline again, so treating it as firm is the only responsible approach.
Who Qualifies Under This Law
Not every survivor with an expired claim qualifies. AB 250 is specifically aimed at cases where a cover-up is part of the factual record. To benefit from the revival window, a survivor generally needs to show that the assault occurred, that the normal filing deadline has passed, and that a perpetrator or responsible entity engaged in conduct designed to conceal the assault or prevent the survivor from seeking legal recourse.
Cover-up conduct can take many forms. An employer who pressured a victim to stay quiet, offered a non-disclosure agreement in exchange for continued employment, or terminated the victim after a complaint was made may have engaged in the kind of institutional concealment AB 250 targets. A school that moved an accused staff member without disclosing the reason, or a healthcare organization that buried internal complaints, may also fall within the statute’s reach.
Survivors who were minors at the time of the assault may have additional protections under existing California law, and AB 250 can layer on top of those protections in cases involving cover-ups. If you are unsure whether your situation qualifies, that question is exactly what an initial consultation with a personal injury attorney is designed to answer.
The Injuries AB 250 Recognizes as Compensable
Sexual assault is a serious physical injury, not only an emotional one. John Reardon spent 20 years as a chiropractor before becoming a personal injury attorney, and that clinical background shapes how we approach these cases. Survivors frequently present with chronic musculoskeletal pain, sleep disorders, somatic symptoms tied to trauma, and long-term neurological effects of sustained stress responses. These are real, documentable physical injuries with measurable treatment costs.
Under California law, a civil claim for sexual assault can seek compensation for medical expenses, including past and future mental health treatment, physical therapy, and any other care connected to the assault. Lost wages and diminished earning capacity are recoverable where the assault or the cover-up, such as a wrongful termination, disrupted the survivor’s career. Non-economic damages for pain, suffering, emotional distress, and loss of enjoyment of life are also available and often represent the largest component of a sexual assault settlement or verdict.
Where an entity engaged in a deliberate cover-up, punitive damages may also be available under California Civil Code section 3294. Punitive damages are designed to punish conduct that is malicious, oppressive, or fraudulent, and institutional concealment of sexual assault can meet that standard. The possibility of punitive damages significantly increases the potential value of these claims compared to cases involving only compensatory losses.
Building a Case Under AB 250
Evidence in a sexual assault case with a cover-up component often looks different from a standard personal injury file. Physical evidence from the assault itself may no longer exist, but the cover-up frequently leaves a documentary trail. Internal communications, HR records, non-disclosure agreements, termination paperwork, and witness accounts from colleagues or other survivors can all be relevant. In institutional cases, prior complaints about the same perpetrator are particularly important because they can establish that the organization knew about the conduct and chose to suppress it rather than act.
Medical and mental health records documenting treatment after the assault establish both the injury and its timeline. A journal or contemporaneous notes made by the survivor, even informal ones, can corroborate the account and demonstrate the ongoing impact of the trauma. If the survivor reported the assault to anyone, including a friend, family member, or coworker, those individuals may be witnesses.
We approach evidence gathering in these cases with the understanding that survivors have often carried this burden alone for years. The goal is to build a factual record that supports the claim without requiring the survivor to relive every detail unnecessarily. That means being strategic about what evidence we pursue and how we present it.
What to Do Before the 2027 Deadline
The December 31, 2027 deadline is not a suggestion. Once it passes, claims that depended on AB 250’s revival window will be permanently barred. Given that civil litigation takes time, including investigation, filing, service, and pre-trial proceedings, waiting until late 2027 to consult an attorney creates real risk of running out of time to build a proper case.
The first step is a confidential consultation with a personal injury attorney who understands both the legal framework of AB 250 and the medical realities of sexual assault trauma. At that consultation, we evaluate whether the cover-up element is present, what evidence may be available, who the responsible parties are, and what categories of compensation apply to your situation.
From there, the process involves gathering and preserving evidence, identifying all potentially liable parties, and making a demand or filing suit within the statutory window. In cases involving institutional defendants, early action also matters because organizations sometimes attempt to destroy or limit access to internal records once litigation is anticipated. A litigation hold letter sent early in the process can prevent that.
If you or someone you know may have a claim that AB 250 revives, we encourage you to reach out to us for a free, confidential consultation. We handle these cases on a contingency basis, meaning you pay nothing unless we recover compensation for you. The window California has opened for survivors is real, but it is also finite. We are here to help you evaluate your options and act before that window closes.