Arizona's Civil Statute of Limitations for Child Sexual Abuse

tree.gif (2094 bytes)

Article: Remedies for Victims of Sexual Abuse

Article: Connecticut version of Remedies article

Article: Arizona - "Florez Revisited: Arizona's New Approach to Extending Statutes of Limitation in Childhood Sexual Abuse Cases"

Legal Resources for Victims of Sexual Abuse

Susan K. Smith
David M. Moore

Attorneys at Law

Mediation, Collaboration
Victims' Remedies
Injury Cases

Smith & Moore, LLC
www.SmithMooreLLC.com
smith-lawfirm.com

24 East Main Street
(Route 44)
Old Avon Village North
Avon, CT 06001
Direct dial:
Atty. Smith: (860) 678-1860
Atty. Moore: (860) 674-0122
Fax: (860) 677-5229
Directions & Map

Atty. Smith's Hartford
Conference Space
21 Oak Street
Suite 208
Hartford, CT 06106
Directions & Map

Martindale-Hubbell
Peer Review Rated
For Ethical Standards and Legal Ability

The Fine Print: This web site provides general information only and cannot be relied upon as legal advice. Laws change and differ from State to State. Applicability of the legal principles discussed may differ substantially in individual situations. You should consult an attorney about your particular situation.

Civil Statute of Limitations
for Child Sexual Abuse

Please help us to keep these pages current.
Send information concerning statutory changes, bad links
and new developments to .

Arizona

Summary

Arizona does not have a special statute of limitations for childhood sexual abuse. It applies it statutory minority and disability tolling provisions to the general tort statute of limitations. A victim has either:

2 years from the date of the injury under the general tort statute of limitations, Arizona Statutes § 12-542;
2 years from reaching the age of minority under Arizona Statutes § 12-502;
2 years from removal of a mental disability (i.e. unsound mind) under Arizona Statutes § 12-502

In Doe v. Roe (Apr. 7, 1998), the Arizona Supreme Court acknowledged the existence of repressed memory and held that repressed memory arising out of CSA may trigger the state's discovery rule and "unsound mind" exception, effectively extending the Statute of Limitations.

*Read an article on the Arizona case and commentary on Arizona's application of the discovery rule.

* Read the full text of the Doe v. Roe decision (83K).

See Also Logerquist v Danforth, 1 P.3d 113 (Arizona 2000). The Arizona Supreme Court refused to preclude evidence of repressed memory on the basis that it was not sufficient scientific. The weight and credibility of the evidence would be decided by the jury.

Resources:

Arizona Revised Statutes
Arizona Sexual Assault Network