Michigan Senate Bill SB0257

Michigan 2025-2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 4/23/25
• Refer: 4/23/25
• Report Pass: 5/6/25
• Refer: 5/6/25
• Report Pass: 5/7/25
• Engrossed: 5/20/25
• Refer: 5/20/25

Caption

Civil procedure: statute of limitations; civil actions for criminal sexual conduct; extend period of limitations, and add grace period for past occurrences. Amends sec. 5851b of 1961 PA 236 (MCL 600.5851b). TIE BAR WITH: SB 258'25, SB 259'25

Summary

SB 257 would amend Michigan’s civil statute of limitations for lawsuits brought by people who were minors when they were victims of criminal sexual conduct. The bill extends the time to file suit by raising the age limit from 28 to 42 and by lengthening the discovery-based filing window from 3 years to 7 years after the injury and its connection to the abuse are discovered or should have been discovered. It also preserves the rule that a civil action may be filed without a prior criminal case, and it keeps the existing provision allowing suits without any time limit when the abuse led to a criminal prosecution and conviction for criminal sexual conduct. The bill also creates a revival window for certain older claims that were previously time-barred. Under that provision, survivors abused as minors after December 31, 1996 and before two years before the bill’s effective date could file suit during a one-year window if the alleged offender was convicted under Michigan’s criminal sexual conduct law and admitted to abusing authority as a physician or engaging in unethical medical treatment or examination. For revived claims barred by prior time limits, the bill caps recovery at $1.5 million per claimant per defendant for each incident or occurrence. The bill is tied to SB 258 and SB 259, meaning it would not take effect unless all three bills become law. The bill’s impact would be to expand civil remedies for survivors of childhood sexual abuse and to reopen some previously expired claims, while also imposing a damages cap on certain revived actions. It would amend section 5851b of the Revised Judicature Act and affect the limitations rules governing civil actions for criminal sexual conduct under Michigan law, particularly claims involving conduct defined in the criminal sexual conduct statutes of the penal code. Overall sentiment appears supportive in the Legislature. The bill passed the Senate 25-9 on third reading and was reported favorably out of committee unanimously, suggesting broad backing for extending survivors’ access to the courts. The available record does not include committee transcript debate, but the vote pattern indicates the measure was generally viewed favorably. The main point of contention is likely the balance between expanding survivors’ rights and limiting defendants’ exposure through the $1.5 million cap on revived claims. Another potential issue is the bill’s narrow revival provision, which applies only to certain older claims involving a conviction and specific physician-related admissions, rather than reopening all time-barred cases. The tie-bar to SB 258 and SB 259 also means the package is interdependent, which can be a procedural and policy point of concern.

Impact

SB 257 would amend MCL 600.5851b to extend the civil statute of limitations for minors who were victims of criminal sexual conduct, increase the age and discovery deadlines for filing, and create a limited revival period for certain previously time-barred claims. It would also add a $1.5 million per-claimant, per-defendant cap for revived claims barred before the effective date, while leaving intact existing rules that allow some suits to proceed without a prior criminal case and without limitation after a conviction. The bill would affect survivors, alleged perpetrators, and civil defendants in sexual abuse litigation, especially in cases involving childhood abuse and physician misconduct.

Sentiment

The available legislative history suggests generally favorable sentiment toward the bill. It was reported out of committee unanimously and passed the Senate by a solid margin, indicating broad support for expanding the filing window for survivors of childhood sexual abuse. The absence of recorded committee transcript debate limits insight into detailed arguments, but the vote history points to a positive reception overall.

Contention

The likely areas of contention are the scope of the revival provision and the inclusion of a damages cap on certain revived claims. Supporters are likely focused on giving survivors more time to come forward, especially given delayed discovery of abuse-related injuries, while critics may question reopening old claims or may object to limiting damages in revived cases. The bill’s narrow eligibility criteria for revived claims—requiring a conviction and specific physician-related admissions—also suggest a compromise that may have been designed to address concerns about fairness and evidentiary reliability.