GET A FREE CONSULTATION
310-750-4149
Reviewed by David Gammill, California trial attorney · Last reviewed: October 23, 2026 · Updated for SB 577 (2026)
When a teacher, coach, counselor, clergy member, or staff member sexually abuses a child, the abuser is responsible. Very often the institution is responsible too. It hired that person, supervised that person, received warnings about that person, or looked the other way. Gammill Law Accident & Injury Lawyers represents survivors and families in civil cases against schools, youth organizations, religious institutions, county facilities, and other institutions in Los Angeles County and throughout California.
Gammill Law has recovered more than $100 million for California clients across verdicts and settlements. Its results include a $21.1 million wrongful death verdict, a $16 million school sexual abuse verdict, and a $12 million whistleblower retaliation verdict. Every case is different, and past results do not guarantee a similar outcome.
You can read this page without contacting anyone. If you do reach out, the conversation is confidential, you decide what to share, and nothing happens unless you ask us to act. Call 310-750-4149 or send a confidential message.
This page is for survivors of sexual abuse that happened while an institution was responsible for their safety, and for the parents and family members who are trying to help them. That includes:
Our work centers on institutional responsibility: cases where a school, organization, or agency had a duty to protect the survivor and failed. If your case does not involve an institution, we will tell you that honestly and try to point you toward a lawyer who can help.
David Gammill was lead trial counsel in a case against a California school district brought by a survivor who had been abused by a teacher decades earlier. After a first trial ended in a mistrial, David Gammill was brought in as lead trial counsel for the retrial. Five other former students came forward and testified. The jury found that the district had been negligent in supervising and retaining the teacher and found $16 million in damages, entirely non-economic.
The verdict matters here for two reasons. It is the kind of case this page is about: an institution that had warning signs and did not act. And it was tried against a public entity, under the rules that govern claims against school districts, which are different from the rules for private defendants. You can read the full account of what the district knew at $16 Million School Sexual Abuse Verdict: What the District Knew.
Every case is different, and past results do not guarantee a similar outcome.
Short answer: If the abuse happened on or after January 1, 2024, there is no filing deadline. If it happened before 2024, most survivors have until age 40, or longer if they only recently connected adult harm to the abuse. That “discovery” period is five years today and shrinks to three years on January 1, 2027. Survivors who are 40 or older and sue a public school district or other government agency over pre-2024 abuse will face a higher burden of proof.
On September 30, 2026, the Governor signed Senate Bill 577, which rewrites parts of how childhood sexual abuse cases work in California, especially cases against public school districts, counties, and other government entities. Most of its changes take effect on January 1, 2027, and one of them reaches back to cases filed during 2026. Many websites still describe the old rules.
| Your situation | The rule |
|---|---|
| Abuse on or after January 1, 2024 | No time limit to sue the abuser or a responsible institution (Code Civ. Proc. § 340.1) |
| Abuse before January 1, 2024 | File within 22 years of turning 18 (age 40), or within the discovery period below, whichever is later (Code Civ. Proc. § 340.11) |
| The discovery period for pre-2024 abuse | Five years from discovering that adult psychological injury was caused by the abuse, through December 31, 2026. Three years starting January 1, 2027 |
| You are 40 or older when you file | Your attorney and a licensed mental health practitioner must file certificates of merit with the complaint, and the court reviews them privately before any defendant is served. Defendants are named as Does until the court allows a corroborated amendment (§§ 340.1, 340.11) |
| You are 40 or older, the abuse was before 2024, and the defendant is a private institution | You must show the institution knew, had reason to know, or was on notice of the risk, or failed to take reasonable safeguards (§ 340.11(c)) |
| You are 40 or older, the abuse was before 2024, and the defendant is a public entity, in a case filed on or after January 1, 2026 | You must prove by clear and convincing evidence both that the entity knew of the misconduct and failed to take reasonable steps, and that it negligently discharged a mandatory duty. This does not apply to a case that already has a judgment or final settlement (§ 340.12, operative January 1, 2027) |
| Cover-up by a private institution | Up to three times the damages may be available (§ 340.1(b)) |
| Cover-up by a public entity | Treble damages are not available. The California Supreme Court held in 2023 that they are punitive and barred against public entities, and SB 577 writes that into the statute |
| Government claim form before suing a public school or county | Not required for childhood sexual assault claims (§§ 340.1(r), 340.11(s)) |
What this means in practice:
These rules have exceptions, and the right deadline depends on your dates, your age, and who the defendant is. Talk to a lawyer before you assume a case is too old or too new. The current text of Code of Civil Procedure § 340.1 and § 340.11 is on the Legislature’s site.
Short answer: A California public school district can be held liable when administrators or supervisors were negligent in hiring, supervising, or keeping an employee who abused a student. Private schools, churches, sports organizations, and other institutions can be liable for the same failures under general negligence law.
The California Supreme Court held in C.A. v. William S. Hart Union High School District (2012) 53 Cal.4th 861 that a public school district can be vicariously liable when its administrators or supervisors negligently hire, supervise, or retain an employee who sexually abuses a student. Schools stand in a special relationship with the students in their care, and that relationship carries a duty to take reasonable steps to protect them. The same principles apply, through ordinary negligence law, to private schools, religious organizations, youth sports clubs, camps, and other institutions that take responsibility for children.
The questions we investigate usually include:
Limits matter too. California law can narrow a district’s responsibility for incidents away from school property and outside school supervision (Education Code § 44808), and public entities are immune from punitive damages (Government Code § 818). An honest evaluation looks at those limits at the start, not after a year of litigation.
| Public school district or other public entity | Private, religious, or charter institution | |
|---|---|---|
| Legal basis | Government Code § 815.2 and the negligent hiring, supervision, and retention theories recognized in C.A. v. William S. Hart | General negligence and related claims |
| Cover-up (treble) damages | Not available | Up to three times the damages may be available (§ 340.1(b)) |
| Punitive damages | Not available (Gov. Code § 818) | May be available, depending on the facts (Civ. Code § 3294) |
| Survivors 40 and older, pre-2024 abuse | Clear-and-convincing standard in cases filed on or after January 1, 2026 (§ 340.12) | Knew, had reason to know, was on notice, or failed to take reasonable safeguards (§ 340.11(c)) |
| Government claim form | Not required for childhood sexual assault claims | Not applicable |
| Joint liability for economic damages | Several only if the entity is 15 percent or less at fault, in cases filed on or after January 1, 2027 | Ordinary joint and several rules |
Youth sports and coaches. Coaches often have exactly the access an abuser looks for: travel, locker rooms, private training, late practices, and trust from parents. Clubs, leagues, gyms, and school athletic departments can be responsible when they ignore warning signs, skip background checks, or fail to supervise.
Churches and religious organizations. A religious institution owes the same basic duty to protect the children in its programs as any other institution. Many of these cases turn on what leadership knew about a clergy member or volunteer and whether that person was moved, kept, or protected after a complaint.
County juvenile facilities, group homes, and foster care. Los Angeles County has faced thousands of claims arising from abuse in juvenile halls, probation camps, and foster placements, and SB 577 directs the Attorney General to investigate abuse in the County’s juvenile facilities and what the County did about it. If you were abused in county custody or in a placement the County arranged, the dates matter under the 2026 changes above, and you should be wary of anyone who offers you money, a loan, or a referral fee to file a claim. A legitimate lawyer does not pay you to become a client.
Camps, after-school programs, and youth organizations. The same questions apply: who was hired, who was warned, and who was supervised.
Colleges and universities. When the student was 18 or older, the adult sexual assault deadlines apply instead of the childhood rules, and claims against public universities may require a government claim within strict deadlines. Those rules have their own exceptions and their own recent changes; get a dated evaluation rather than a guess.
Doctors, therapists, and other professionals. Abuse by a treating professional can create claims against the person and, where the practice or facility ignored complaints or failed to supervise, against the institution as well.
We try cases against institutions, including government entities. The $16 million school sexual abuse verdict was a jury verdict against a public school district. Cases against public entities have their own rules, their own deadlines, and their own defense playbook, and this firm has tried them.
David Gammill is a trial lawyer, not a settlement mill. A former Los Angeles County Deputy District Attorney who has tried over 100 cases to verdict, first as a prosecutor and then as a trial lawyer for injured people, David Gammill prepares every case as if it will be tried. Every case is different, and past results do not guarantee a similar outcome.
You are not a file number. This is a Torrance trial firm, not a national advertising brand. Your case is worked by the lawyer whose name is on the door, and the people you talk to in the first call are the people who handle your case.
We will tell you the truth about your case. That includes when a deadline has passed, when a defendant is immune, or when the evidence will not carry the burden the law now requires. A careful evaluation protects you, and it is also what the law demands: SB 577 added a $25,000 penalty for lawyers who file childhood sexual abuse claims in bad faith.
A civil case is separate from any criminal case. You do not need a criminal conviction, or even a police report, to bring a civil claim, although a report often helps.
A confidential first conversation. What you tell us while deciding whether to hire us is confidential, even if you never hire us. You do not have to give your name to ask a general question.
Filing under a pseudonym. California courts can allow a survivor to proceed as “Jane Doe” or “John Doe” when the survivor’s privacy interest overrides the public’s interest in knowing a party’s name, which is a showing abuse survivors can often make. We discuss privacy options before anything is filed, and when the survivor is 40 or older the defendants themselves are named as Does until the court allows a corroborated amendment.
Investigation. We gather personnel files, prior complaints, policies, communications, and witness accounts, much of it through formal discovery once a case is filed. In the $16 million verdict, what the district knew came out of its own records and the testimony of former students.
Experts. Abuse cases often involve psychologists and institutional-practices experts who can explain both the harm and what the institution should have done.
Resolution. Many cases settle. Some go to trial. The decision to settle is always yours.
Fees. Gammill Law handles these cases on a contingency fee: no fee unless we recover for you. How that works, including costs, is explained on our no win, no fee page.
Yes, in many cases. A California public school district can be responsible when its administrators were negligent in hiring, supervising, or retaining the employee (C.A. v. William S. Hart Union High School Dist. (2012) 53 Cal.4th 861). Private schools can be responsible under general negligence principles. The $16 million verdict described above was a case against a public school district.
For abuse on or after January 1, 2024, no. For earlier abuse, generally until age 40 or within a discovery period after you realize the abuse caused adult psychological harm, whichever is later. That period is five years through December 31, 2026 and three years starting January 1, 2027 (Code Civ. Proc. §§ 340.1, 340.11).
SB 577 shortens the discovery period for pre-2024 abuse from five years to three starting January 1, 2027. It requires survivors 40 and older suing a public entity over pre-2024 abuse, in cases filed on or after January 1, 2026, to prove by clear and convincing evidence that the entity knew of the misconduct, failed to act, and negligently discharged a mandatory duty. It confirms that cover-up treble damages are not available against public entities, limits joint liability for a public entity’s share of economic damages, requires schools and local agencies to adopt sexual assault prevention plans by December 1, 2027, and penalizes lawyers who file these claims in bad faith.
Not for a childhood sexual assault claim. Other claims against public entities, including some involving adult students, still require a government claim, often within six months.
It may still be possible to file, depending on your age, when you connected adult harm to the abuse, and who the defendant is. The 2020 to 2022 revival window has closed, and SB 577 makes some older claims against public entities harder to prove. Get a dated evaluation rather than assuming either way.
Not necessarily. Courts can allow survivors to proceed under a pseudonym when privacy outweighs the public’s interest in a party’s identity, and we raise it before anything is filed.
No. Civil cases are separate and use a lower standard of proof, a preponderance of the evidence, except where SB 577’s clear-and-convincing standard applies.
Schools can be responsible for student-on-student abuse when staff knew or should have known of the risk and failed to supervise. These cases depend heavily on the facts, and we evaluate them individually.
The institutional responsibility principles do. The deadlines are different, and some have changed recently. Contact us and we will tell you which rules apply to your dates.
If something happened to you or your child at a school, a team, a church, a camp, a clinic, or a county facility, you can talk to us about it confidentially. You do not have to decide anything on the first call.
Call 310-750-4149 or send a confidential message. Gammill Law Accident & Injury Lawyers, 3820 Del Amo Blvd, Ste 304, Torrance, CA 90503, serving Los Angeles County and all of California.
This page is attorney advertising and general information, not legal advice for any specific situation. Reading it or contacting us does not create an attorney-client relationship. Deadlines and outcomes are fact-specific; consult a licensed California attorney about your own circumstances. Every case is different, and past results do not guarantee a similar outcome.
