Legislative Analysis
Phone: (517) 373-8080
CIVIL ACTIONS FOR CRIMINAL SEXUAL CONDUCT
http://www.house.mi.gov/hfa
House Bill 4306 as introduced Analysis available at
Sponsor: Rep. Karen Whitsett http://www.legislature.mi.gov
House Bill 4307 as introduced
Sponsor: Rep. Ryan Berman
Committee: Oversight
Complete to 9-30-21
SUMMARY:
House Bill 4306 would amend the Revised Judicature Act to do all of the following:
• Revise the statutes of limitations for when an adult or minor victim of a sexual assault
may bring a civil action for damages sustained as a result of that assault to no longer
differentiate between adult and minor victims.
• Extend a window in which to commence an action for criminal sexual conduct (CSC)
from three years from the time of the assault or the discovery of the assault to six years
from that time.
• Create a one-year window in which victims of CSC committed by a physician or
individual under the guise of providing medical treatment could commence an action,
including against a governmental entity.
House Bill 4307 would amend 1964 PA 170, the governmental immunity law, to provide that
the act does not grant immunity to a governmental agency or its employees or agents regarding
conduct involving CSC if the agency or employees or agents knew or should have known that
an individual had committed a prior act of CSC and failed to act or intervene to prevent a
subsequent act of CSC by that individual.
For both bills, criminal sexual conduct (CSC) would be defined as conduct prohibited
under section 520b, 520c, 520d, 520e, or 520g of the Michigan Penal Code, which
respectively prohibit criminal sexual conduct in the first, second, third, or fourth degree
or assault with intent to commit criminal sexual conduct in the first, second, or third
degree.
House Bill 4306 would amend the statute of limitations for civil actions under the Revised
Judicature Act. A statute of limitations refers to the amount of time a plaintiff has to file an
action. Civil actions enable a plaintiff to recover damages for injuries to persons or property.
Currently, section 5805 establishes a statute of limitations of 10 years for an action to recover
damages sustained because of CSC. Under section 5851b, an individual who was a victim of
CSC as a minor may bring a civil action at any time before he or she reaches 28 years of age
or three years after the date he or she discovers, or through the exercise of due diligence should
have discovered, both his or her injury and the causal relationship between the injury and the
CSC, whichever occurs later.
House Fiscal Agency Page 1 of 3
 The bill would delete the 10-year statute of limitations in section 5805 for adult victims of CSC
and revise the statute of limitations in section 5851b for minor victims of CSC to instead apply
to any victim of CSC. The bill also would extend the time period for filing after discovery from
three years to six years. Under the bill, an individual who is the victim of CSC could commence
an action to recover damages sustained because of the CSC at any time before whichever of
the following is later:
• Ten years after the time the claim accrues.
• The date the individual reaches 28 years of age.
• Six years (increased from three years) after the individual discovers, or through the
exercise of due diligence should have discovered, both his or her injury and the causal
relationship between the injury and the CSC.
As currently, it would not be necessary for a criminal prosecution or other proceeding to have
been brought as a result of the conduct or that such a prosecution or proceeding have resulted
in a conviction or juvenile adjudication.
Claims involving CSC under the guise of medical treatment
Additionally, regardless of other periods of limitation, section 5851b allowed an individual
who, while a minor, was the victim of CSC after December 31, 1996, but before June 12, 2016,
to commence an action by September 10, 2018, to recover damages sustained because of the
CSC if the person alleged to have committed the CSC was convicted of CSC in the first degree
against any person under section 520b of the Michigan Penal Code and admitted to certain
facts pertaining to his or her conduct. This provision was added by 2018 PA 183 to allow claims
of victims of CSC related to Larry Nassar, the former sports medicine doctor at Michigan State
University, to go forward. (The June 12, 2016, and September 10, 2018, dates in the provision
are respectively two years before the effective date of 2018 PA 183 and 90 days after that date.)
The bill would revise that provision to instead apply, regardless of other periods of limitation,
to both adult and minor victims of CSC under certain circumstances. An individual who was
the victim of CSC could commence an action against the individual alleged to have committed
the CSC or any other person to recover damages sustained because of the CSC within one year
after the effective date of HB 4306 if either of the following applies:
• The individual alleged to have committed the CSC was in a position of authority over
the victim as the victim’s physician and used that authority to coerce the victim to
submit.
• The individual alleged to have committed the CSC engaged in purported medical
treatment or examination of the victim in a manner that is, or for purposes that are,
medically recognized as unethical or unacceptable.
Person would mean an individual, partnership, corporation, association, governmental
entity, or other legal entity.
The bill would retain language providing that section 5851b does not limit an individual’s right
to bring an action under section 5851 (which provides for an extended period of limitations if
the person entitled to bring an action is under 18 years of age at the time the claim accrues).
The bill would add that nothing in the act or any previous or subsequent act would limit the
causes of action available to a plaintiff, including causes of action against persons other than
the individual alleged to have committed the CSC.
House Fiscal Agency HBs 4306 and 4307 as introduced Page 2 of 3
 Claims against the state
The bill also would exempt a claim for compensation to which section 5851b would apply from
statutes of limitations for filing a claim against the state that could otherwise restrict or bar
claims filed under that provision. For example, the act requires all actions claiming property
damage or personal injuries to be filed, or a notice of intent to be filed, within six months after
the damage or injury occurred. The bill would provide an exception to this limitation for a
claim to which section 5851b applies. The bill also would exempt such a claim from the
permanent bar on bringing a claim against the state unless the claim is filed with the clerk of
the Court of Claims, or an action commenced on the claim in federal court (as authorized under
the act), within three years after the claim first accrues.
MCL 600.5805 et seq.
House Bill 4307 would add a new section to 1964 PA 170, which pertains to governmental
liability for negligence, to provide that the act does not grant immunity to a governmental
agency or an employee or agent of a governmental agency with respect to conduct involving
CSC if both of the following apply:
• The governmental agency or employee or agent knew or should have known that the
individual who committed the CSC had committed a prior act of CSC.
• The governmental agency or employee or agent failed to act or intervene to prevent the
subsequent criminal sexual conduct.
Nothing in the act or any previous or subsequent act would limit the causes of action available
to a plaintiff, including causes of action against persons other than the individual alleged to
have committed the CSC. For purposes of the new section, it would not be necessary for a
criminal prosecution or other proceeding to have been brought as a result of the CSC or for a
prosecution or proceeding that was brought to have resulted in a conviction or in an
adjudication under Chapter XIIA of the Probate Code (known as the juvenile code).
MCL 691.1407 and proposed MCL 691.1407d
Finally, each bill would provide that it is curative, must be retroactively applied, applies to
actions pending on the bill’s effective date, and is intended to express the original intent of the
legislature regarding the application of the act that the bill would amend.
FISCAL IMPACT:
House Bills 4306 and 4307 would have an indeterminate fiscal impact on local court funding
units. Any fiscal impact would be directly related to how provisions of the bills affect court
caseloads, the complexity of the lawsuits, and related administrative costs.
Legislative Analyst: Susan Stutzky
Fiscal Analyst: Robin Risko
■ This analysis was prepared by nonpartisan House Fiscal Agency staff for use by House members in their
deliberations and does not constitute an official statement of legislative intent.
House Fiscal Agency HBs 4306 and 4307 as introduced Page 3 of 3


Statutes affected:
House Introduced Bill: 691.1407