 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Cosgriffe v. Cosgriffe11/24/1993
Submitted September 16, 1993.
This is an appeal from an order of the District Court of the Thirteenth Judicial District, Yellowstone County, the Honorable Maurice R. Colberg, Jr., presiding, granting respondent Richard Cosgriffe's motion for summary judgment. We reverse.
One issue is before this Court:
Whether § 27-2-216, MCA, the statute of limitations for claims involving childhood sexual abuse, violates the state or federal constitutions because it provides for retroactive application.
In January 1991, at the age of forty-one, the appellant Carol Cosgriffe filed a complaint in District Court pursuant to § 27-2-216, MCA, against respondent, Richard Cosgriffe, her natural father. Her complaint set forth several alleged instances of sexual abuse by respondent which she alleges occurred between the years 1965 and 1967, when she was between the ages of sixteen and nineteen. The appellant alleges that due to respondent's abuse she has sustained severe emotional and physical injuries, including damage to her self esteem, an inability to maintain gainful, continuous employment, drug and alcohol dependency, sexual promiscuity, and an inability to maintain meaningful, long-term relationships. Appellant further alleges that it was only after consulting a psychiatrist and through counseling she discovered her problems were caused by the alleged abuse and that the discovery occurred only a short time prior to the filing of her complaint.
The respondent moved the court for summary judgment on the following grounds:
1. Section 27-2-216, MCA, violates the due process requirements of the Fourteenth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.
2. Section 27-2-216, MCA, violates Article II, Section 17 (Due Process) and Section 31 (ex post facto laws) of the Montana Constitution.
3. Section 27-2-216(3), MCA, is unconstitutional because it is vague, uncertain and indefinite.
Following a thorough briefing of the matter before the District Court, the court granted respondent's motion for summary judgment.
The legislative history indicates that § 27-2-216, MCA, was enacted in response to this Court's opinion in E.W. v. D.C.H. (1988), 231 Mont. 481, 754 P.2d 817. In that case, this Court stated:
While this Court is aware of the horrifying damage inflicted by child molesters, it is not for us to rewrite the statute of limitations to accommodate such claims through judicial fiat. Such task is properly vested in the legislature.
E.W., 754 P.2d at 821.
Section 27-2-216, MCA, enacted in 1989, states in its entirety:
27-2-216. Tort actions — childhood sexual abuse. (1) An action based on intentional conduct brought by a person for recovery of damages for injury suffered as a result of childhood sexual abuse must be commenced not later than:
(a) 3 years after the act of childhood sexual abuse that is alleged to have caused the injury; or
(b) 3 years after the plaintiff discovers or reasonably should have discovered that the injury was caused by the act of childhood sexual abuse.
(2) It is not necessary for a plaintiff to establish which act, in a series of acts of childhood sexual abuse, caused the injury that is the subject of the suit. The plaintiff may compute the period referred to in subsection (1)(a) from the date of the last act by the same perpetrator.
(3) As used in this section, "childhood sexual abuse" means any act committed against a plaintiff who was less than 18 years of age at the time the act occurred and that would have been a violation of 45-5-50
Page 1 2 3 4 Montana Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|