Corporations and Associations - Limitations on Election and Ballot Issue Activities (Maryland Corporate Power Reset Act)
Summary
HB1378 revises Maryland law governing civil actions for child sexual abuse, with a particular focus on claims brought against the State, local governments, and county boards of education. The bill preserves the ability of survivors to file claims arising from abuse that occurred while they were minors, but it adds new limits and timing rules for certain claims that would otherwise have been barred by prior time limitations. In particular, it bars new actions against the State or a unit of State government from being filed on or after January 1, 2026, and it creates different noneconomic damages caps depending on whether an action is filed on or before May 31, 2025, or on or after June 1, 2025.
Impact
The bill amends provisions in the Courts and Judicial Proceedings Article, the Education Article, and the State Government Article. It changes the Child Victims Act framework by setting new damages caps for child sexual abuse claims, adjusting liability limits for the State, local governments, and county boards of education, and revising sovereign immunity rules and insurance coverage requirements for school boards. It also limits attorney fees in certain later-filed cases and requires the Maryland Judiciary to report award information and claim summaries annually to the General Assembly.
Sentiment
The voting history suggests the bill moved with substantial support, passing third reading in the House by wide margins. The text reflects a policy compromise: it continues to allow survivor claims and preserves liability exposure for public entities, but it also imposes tighter caps and a filing cutoff for claims against the State. Overall, the bill appears to have been viewed as a significant but measured adjustment to existing child sexual abuse litigation rules rather than a wholesale repeal of survivor remedies.
Contention
The main points of contention are likely the new filing deadline for claims against the State, the reduced noneconomic damages cap for later-filed claims, and the lower liability limits for local governments and school boards in certain cases. Survivor advocates would likely object to narrowing recovery and imposing a cutoff date, while State and local government interests would favor the added predictability and reduced fiscal exposure. The attorney-fee limits and the distinction between claims filed before and after June 1, 2025, also appear to be notable pressure points.