SB577 - Public entities.

Amended IN Assembly August 27, 2026 Amended IN Assembly July 09, 2025 Amended IN Senate April 28, 2025 Amended IN Senate March 26, 2025 CALIFORNIA LEGISLATURE— 2025–2026 REGULAR SESSION Senate Bill No. 577 Introduced by Senators Laird and Allen (Principal coauthors: Assembly Members McKinnor and Ward) February 20, 2025 An act to add Section 6095.2 to the Business and Professions Code, to amend Section 1431.2 of the Civil Code, to amend Sections 340.1, 340.11, 864, and 1038 of, and to add Sections Section 340.12 and 341.95 to, the Code of Civil Procedure, to amend Sections 41320, 41329.52, and 41329.53 of, and to add Chapter 5 (commencing with Section 14560) to Part 9 of Division 1 of Title 1 of, the Education Code, to add Section 50035 to the Government Code, to add Sections 1526.76, 1534.2, and 1534.3 to the Health and Safety Code, to amend Section 11165.7 of, amend, repeal, and add Section 832.7 of, and to add Section 11054.6 to, the Penal Code, and to add Sections 2203, 16166.5, and 16500.2 to, and to add and repeal Section 16545.5 of, the Welfare and Institutions Code, relating to state government. public entities. LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL'S DIGEST SB 577, as amended, Laird. State Government. Public entities. (1) Existing law requires that specified actions for recovery of damages suffered as a result of childhood sexual assault that occurred before January 1, 2024, be commenced within 22 years of the date the plaintiff attains the age of majority or within 5 years of the date the plaintiff discovers or reasonably should have discovered that psychological injury or illness occurring after the age of majority was caused by the sexual assault, whichever period expires later. Existing law prohibits a plaintiff from commencing specified actions against a person or entity who did not commit the act of childhood sexual assault on or after the plaintiff’s 40th birthday unless the offending person or entity knew or had reason to know of any misconduct that created a risk of childhood sexual assault by an employee, volunteer, representative, or agent, or the person or entity failed to take reasonable steps or to implement reasonable safeguards to avoid acts of childhood sexual assault. Existing law provides that there is no time limit for commencement of such actions for recovery of damages suffered as a result of childhood sexual assault which occurred on or after January 1, 2024. Actions subject to these time limits include actions for liability against any person or entity who owed a duty of care to the plaintiff and an action for liability against any person or entity for an intentional act that was the legal cause of the childhood sexual assault. Existing law provides that in actions against entities for violation of a duty of care, the plaintiff must establish that the entity acted wrongfully or negligently. This bill would shorten the amount of time a victim of childhood sexual assault that occurred before January 1, 2024, would have to file a specified action to 22 years from the date the plaintiff attains the age of majority or within 3 years of the date the plaintiff discovers or reasonably should have discovered that psychological injury or illness occurring after the age of majority was caused by the sexual assault, whichever period expires later. This The bill would, for actions seeking damages for childhood sexual assault that occurred before January 1, 2024, and filed on or after April 15, 2025, January 1, 2026, against a public entity, or one of its employees or agents, by a plaintiff who is 40 years of age or older, increase the standard of liability to gross negligence. For all cases against a public entity filed on or after April 15, 2025, this bill require the plaintiff to prove by clear and convincing evidence that the public entity knew of misconduct that resulted in childhood sexual assault and failed to take reasonable steps or implement safeguards to avoid it, as specified, and that the public entity negligently discharged a mandatory duty. For these cases, the bill would provide factors that courts must consider also require the court to review specified factors when reviewing adjudicating motions for remittitur and would authorize a court to structure judgments against public entities so that they could be paid over time. This bill would require all cases filed by victims of childhood sexual assault that occurred at the MacLaren Children’s Center or any juvenile probation facility or detention center operated by the Los Angeles County Probation Department that was closed before or on January 1, 2020, be filed on or before January 1, 2026. This bill specifies that the procedural requirements that typically apply to such causes of action, including the requirement that plaintiffs who file their claims at the age of 40 or greater file a certificate of merit, as specified, also apply to these specific cases. This bill would require that in these cases, certificates of merit along with additional information shall be provided to a court-appointed special master. This bill would prohibit a special master from distributing funds pursuant to a settlement agreement until all of those requirements have been satisfied. (2) For actions for recovery of damages suffered as a result of childhood sexual assault that occurred before January 1, 2024, assault, existing law requires a plaintiff 40 years of age or older at the time the action is filed to file certificates of merit. merit executed by the plaintiff’s attorney and a mental health practitioner setting forth specified information. Existing law provides that the failure to file certificates in accordance with these provisions is grounds for a demurrer. This bill would instead require the certificates to be filed concurrently with the complaint and would prohibit a court clerk from accepting the filing of a complaint that lacks the certificates, except as specified. Additionally, the bill would require the certificates of merit to declare that the plaintiff’s attorney is licensed to practice law in California and is in good standing with the State Bar. (3) Existing law authorizes a person who is sexually assaulted and victim of childhood sexual assault who proves it was as the result of a cover up, as defined, to recover up to treble damages against the defendant who is found to have covered up the sexual assault, unless prohibited by another law. This bill would prohibit such treble damages from being imposed against a defendant that is a public entity. (4) Existing law prescribes the powers and duties of local legislative bodies. Under existing law, if a statute requires a local agency to take legislative action by resolution, and the local agency’s charter requires it to take legislative action by ordinance, action by ordinance is compliant with the statute for all purposes. On or before December 1, 2027, this bill would require a local governmental body and a local educational agency, as those terms are defined, to each adopt codes of conduct and a sexual assault prevention plan that promote a safe environment for minors, as specified. The bill would require a local governmental body and a local educational agency to each adopt written policies, plans, or specifications regarding how grooming and sexual abuse concerns and risks will be reported. The bill would require a local governmental body to submit a copy of its adopted codes of conduct to the Attorney General on or before January 1, 2028, and would require the Attorney General to issue a report to the relevant policy committees of the Legislature on or before January 1, 2029, that lists, among other things, each local governmental body or local educational agency that has or has not complied with the requirements prescribed by this bill. The bill would provide that if a local governmental body or local educational agency is licensed or certified by a state agency to provide care or services to minors, the codes of conduct the agency must draft may not supersede the state laws or regulations enforced by the licensing or certifying agency. By imposing new duties on local governments, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. (5) The State Bar Act provides for the licensure and regulation of attorneys by the State Bar of California (State Bar), a public corporation governed by a board of trustees. Existing law subjects an attorney to discipline by the State Bar for violating the rules of professional conduct, among other acts, and it also subjects an attorney to civil penalties or criminal sanctions, including for unlawful solicitation, as specified. This bill would subject an attorney who brings a civil claim alleging childhood sexual assault in bad faith, as defined, to a civil penalty of $25,000 per violation. The bill would additionally authorize the Attorney General, a city attorney, or a county counsel to enforce those provisions. The bill would entitle a prevailing plaintiff in an action seeking this civil penalty to an award of reasonable attorney’s fees and costs. (6) Existing law makes the personnel records of peace officers and custodial officers confidential and not disclosable in any criminal or civil proceeding except through discovery, as specified. This limitation does not apply to investigations or proceedings concerning the conduct of such officers that are conducted by specified entities, such as a grand jury, a district attorney, or the Commission on Peace Officer Standards and Training. Beginning January 1, 2028, this bill would also exclude an investigation or proceeding conducted by the Division of the Ombudsperson of the Office of Youth and Community Restoration from this limitation. (7) In a civil action for personal injury, property damage, or wrongful death, existing law prohibits the joint liability of each defendant for noneconomic damages, as defined. Existing law requires each defendant in such an action to be liable only for the amount of noneconomic damages allocated to that defendant in direct proportion to that defendant’s percentage of fault. In a civil action filed on or after January 1, 2027, alleging personal injury, property damage, or wrongful death against a public entity, this bill would also prohibit the joint liability of each public entity defendant for economic damages, as defined, unless the public entity is found to be more than 15% at fault. (4) (8) Under existing law, bonds, warrants, contracts, obligations, and evidences of indebtedness, for the purpose of validating proceedings, are deemed to be in existence upon their authorization, as specified. This bill would provide that, for purposes of determining the validity of refunding bonds to refund a tort action judgment entered against a public agency, as specified, indebtedness is deemed to be in existence on the date of adoption by the governing body of the public agency of a resolution or ordinance, as specified. (5) (9) Existing law permits a defendant or a cross-defendant in a civil proceeding under the Government Claims Act, or in any civil action for indemnity or contribution, to seek from the court, at the time of the granting of a motion for summary judgment, directed verdict, motion for judgment in a nonjury trial, or nonsuit dismissing the moving party other than the plaintiff, petitioner, cross-complainant, or intervenor, a determination of whether the plaintiff, petitioner, cross-complainant, or intervenor brought their proceeding in good faith and with reasonable cause. If the court determines that the proceeding was not brought in good faith or with reasonable cause, existing law requires the court to decide the reasonable and necessary defense costs incurred by the party opposing the proceeding and to render judgment in favor of that party. Existing law applies these provisions only if the defendant or cross-defendant has made a motion for summary judgment, a motion for directed verdict, a motion for judgment in a nonjury trial, or nonsuit. This bill would expand the above provision to apply to a motion for judgment on the pleadings or a demurrer brought by a defendant or cross-defendant. The bill would require a motion brought by a defendant or cross-defendant to identify the specific plaintiffs for which the court’s determination, as described above, is sought. The bill would also prohibit an award of defense costs under these provisions against an attorney from being passed on to a client as a litigation cost. (6) (10) Existing law, the California School Finance Authority Act, authorizes a participating party, as defined, in connection with securing financing or refinancing of a project, or working capital, as defined, to elect to provide for funding payments of bonds issued by the California School Finance Authority and related obligations by electing to participate in a state or local intercept, or both, by an action of its governing board. Existing law requires the Controller, the county treasurer, or other appropriate county fiscal officer, as applicable, upon receipt of written notice provided by the participating party, to make an apportionment or revenue transfer from specified moneys designated for apportionment to the participating party. This bill would provide a similar authorization to a participating party, as defined, in connection with securing financing, refinancing, or refunding of a public debt obligation, as defined, to elect to provide for funding payments of the public debt obligation by electing to participate in a state or local intercept, or both, by an action of its governing board. The bill would require the Controller, the county treasurer, or other appropriate county fiscal officer, as applicable, upon receipt of written notice provided by the participating party, to make an apportionment or revenue transfer from specified moneys designated for apportionment to the participating party, as provided. The bill would authorize, and not require, a county to participate in local intercepts under these provisions. The bill would require a participating party to certify the payment schedule, as specified. By expanding the crime of perjury, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. (7) (11) Existing law authorizes the governing board of a school district that determines during a fiscal year that its revenues are less than the amount necessary to meet its current year expenditure obligations to request an emergency apportionment through the Superintendent of Public Instruction, subject to specified requirements. Existing law prescribes the financing conditions on emergency apportionments, including a requirement for a school district to develop a schedule to repay the emergency loan, which the county superintendent of schools is required to review, comment on, and submit to the Superintendent for approval. Existing law authorizes emergency apportionments to be provided through an interim loan from the General Fund and lease financing to [Text truncated for display. Full text available on Congress.gov.]