In summary
A California law took effect in 2020 that dropped the statute of limitations for filing lawsuits, provided a three-year window for victims to file claims and otherwise made it easier for them to sue school districts and counties.
When Samantha Muñoz was a second grader at Fancher Creek Elementary in Clovis, her teacher told her she “wasn’t that bright” and needed extra help with schoolwork. He’d make her stay in the classroom at recess, or tell her to sit on his lap while other students were busy with assignments.
During those quiet times in the classroom, she said, he sexually abused her — over and over, for at least a semester, even after the school principal walked in on him.
“No one knew. I just didn’t know who to run to. I ran to the school, and they shut me down into silence,” said Muñoz, who’s now 28. “But (now) I’ve figured, no one should be living like this. It’s time to speak your truth and make it OK to talk about. It’s a sensitive topic, but it needs awareness and closure.”
Muñoz, who lives in Fresno County, is part of a multi-plaintiff lawsuit against the Clovis Unified School District alleging the district knew about Muñoz’s teacher but — for at least seven years, from 2005-2012 — did not stop him from abusing students. Clovis Unified had no comment on the case because of the litigation.
Muñoz’s case is one of at least 1,000 lawsuits against California school districts and counties stemming from AB 218, a sexual abuse reform law that took effect in 2020. It temporarily dropped the statute of limitations, provided a three-year window for victims to file claims and otherwise made it easier for them to sue school districts and counties.
The cases span decades, some as early as the 1940s. In many cases the perpetrator is dead, the district staff has turned over, and there’s no longer a paper trail of the original complaint, if there ever was one.
The new law has resulted in a slew of payouts to abuse survivors, most in the range of $5 million to $10 million but some much higher. In 2023 a jury delivered a $135 million verdict against Moreno Valley Unified in Riverside County. Los Angeles Unified is expecting to pay more than $500 million to settle a portion of its claims. Overall, the claims against schools total nearly $3 billion.
Counties also have paid out large sums of money. In April, Los Angeles County paid $4 billion to settle 6,800 abuse claims from victims who were abused in foster care or in probation department facilities. Like many government entities, Los Angeles County is self-insured.
The settlements have been so large that they’ve brought some school districts to the brink of financial insolvency and state takeover. They’ve also resulted in steep spikes in insurance payments for all school districts, regardless of whether they’ve been sued.
‘Untenable’
Carpinteria Unified is among those districts facing financial collapse.
The predominantly low-income Latino district near Santa Barbara has been served with four sexual abuse lawsuits, all involving the same perpetrator: a principal who was convicted in 1986 of abusing several boys in the 1970s and early 1980s.
“These suits are settling for $5 million to $10 million each, and we have a $42 million budget. You do the math,” said Superintendent Diana Rigby. “It’s untenable.”
The district has already spent $750,000 on legal fees, and has had to lay off staff, increase class sizes and cut field trips, enrichment activities and other programs to pay its legal bills. Although the district had insurance at the time of the abuse, the company has since gone out of business and its current insurance company won’t cover old claims.
The perpetrator is dead and the district staff has turned over 100% since the incidents occurred. Years ago, the district instituted strict protocols for abuse claims, immediately contacting the police and placing the alleged perpetrator on leave until an investigation is complete.
Rigby worries about how her district will survive. If the state takes it over, it’ll lose its school board and superintendent, and further cuts will be inevitable.
“We believe all the victims need to be compensated for these heinous crimes,” Rigby said. “But AB 218 is causing current students and taxpayers to pay for crimes that happened 50 years ago, that they had nothing to do with. There has to be a better solution.”
Legislative solution?
Several current bills in the Legislature would curb the law, at least somewhat. A bill by Sen. John Laird, SB 577, would bring back a statute of limitations, make it easier for districts to issue bonds to pay off settlements and take other steps to give some relief to school districts and other public agencies. But it doesn’t cap attorneys’ fees or settlements.
The political reality, Laird said, is that there’s not enough support in the Legislature to limit legal settlements in abuse cases.
“We’re trying to walk between the poles of avoiding billions of dollars in settlements, while not neglecting the rights of victims,” said Laird, a Democrat from Santa Cruz.
The bill passed the Senate and is now in the Assembly judiciary committee.
Consumer Attorneys of California is neutral on the bill, but several school lobbying groups have opposed it, saying it doesn’t go far enough. One group, the Association of California School Administrators, would also like to see school districts share responsibility for paying settlements with the perpetrator or other groups that might be involved, such as sports or after-school organizations. The group also wants the state to study the possibility of a victims’ fund that’s not entirely monetary; it could also include mental and physical health services.
The abuse settlements are the worst financial threat to school districts since the Great Recession of 2008-2009, said Mike Fine, director of the Fiscal Crisis Management and Assistance Team, which advises the state and school districts on financial matters.
“These suits are settling for $5 million to $10 million each, and we have a $42 million budget. You do the math. It’s untenable.”
Diana Rigby, superintendent at Carpinteria Unified
His group is recommending that the state create a database of abuse claims as well as teachers who have been accused, to prevent perpetrators from bouncing from one district to another. The group also recommends more flexibility on settlement payment plans, and an alternative to state takeover for districts that are out of money.
Like Laird, Fine’s group is not calling for a cap on settlements or attorney fees. “We didn’t think tort reform was within our scope,” Fine said.
They’re also not calling for a state-financed victims’ fund, something school districts have asked for. Laird said the state lacks the money for such a fund. Fine’s group omitted it from its recommendations because a victims’ fund could preclude a trial, and Fine said that victims should have a right to go to court and have their voices heard.
But schools’ top priority, Fine said, should be setting tough protocols to prevent abuse from happening in the first place. Although some districts have instituted safeguards, not all have, and the state doesn’t have a uniform policy because it’s deemed a local issue.
“Schools have to hold themselves to a higher standard, and we’ve clearly failed in this regard,” Fine said. “This simply has to stop.”
‘Prime time’ for trial attorneys
The sexual abuse law has been a windfall for trial attorneys. Billboards seeking clients have cropped up around the state, and lawyers from throughout the country have come to California to file claims.
Typically attorneys in abuse lawsuits work for free until there’s a resolution, and then collect a portion of the payout if the plaintiff prevails — in some instances up to 40%, depending on the complexity of the case.
Dorothy Johnson, legislative advocate for the Association of California School Administrators, called the current scenario “prime time” for trial attorneys in California, but forcing impossible burdens onto school districts and other agencies. Schools are already contending with financial hardships due to declining enrollment, the end of pandemic relief funds and federal education cuts. These settlements are pushing some districts over the edge — while attorneys are making millions, she said.
“We don’t think trial attorneys should be profiting at the expense of current students,” Johnson said. “We want to make sure victims get resolution but at the same time put some guardrails up. Right now, there are no guardrails.”
The trial attorneys’ association is not opposed to changes in the law, as long as victims’ rights aren’t curtailed, said Nancy Peverini, legislative director for California Consumer Attorneys.
“There’s an understanding that we need to find a balance, but it’s really important that survivors’ voices don’t get lost,” Peverini said.
Hard choices in Montecito
Montecito — a scenic enclave near Santa Barbara — is home to Prince Harry and Meghan, Duchess of Sussex, Oprah Winfrey and other celebrities. With sweeping views of the Pacific and Santa Ynez mountains, it’s one of the most affluent and exclusive towns in the country. Its school district, however, is facing financial calamity and a possible state takeover.
Montecito Union Elementary District serves about 350 students, mostly children from affluent families but also the children of Montecito’s landscapers and housekeepers. Earlier this year, it took in 42 students from Pacific Palisades, which was largely destroyed in a wildfire.
In 2023, three former students sued the district over sexual abuse they said they experienced from 1972-76. The district denied the claim, and is negotiating a settlement. The payout and legal costs could swell to $20 million — more than the district’s annual budget. Even a state loan wouldn’t solve the problem, because the payments would be more than the district can afford, according to Fine’s organization.
The district’s insurance company at the time of the alleged abuse no longer exists, and its current insurer doesn’t cover events from that long ago. That means that like Carpinteria Unified, Montecito will have to pay the entire cost — cutting programs, borrowing money and using reserves.
“First of all, there’s a whole lot of empathy. We were heartbroken to hear these allegations,” Superintendent Anthony Ranii said. “But none of us were here then. Many of us weren’t even born. The alleged perpetrator and witnesses are dead. We’re putting the responsibility for something that might or might not have happened in 1972 100% on the heads of students in 2025. That’s not fair.”
‘We need awareness’
For Muñoz, the abuse she suffered during the 2004-05 school year took more than a decade to come to terms with. Even after the abuse stopped, Muñoz found school difficult, socially and academically. She lost trust in adults and emotionally withdrew. She never talked about what happened, not even to her family.
Neng Yang, the teacher whom Muñoz said abused her, was arrested and tried in 2014 on 45 counts of sexual abuse on a child under age 10, based on testimony from numerous victims who were students at Fancher Creek Elementary. He was convicted and is serving a 38-year sentence.
Muñoz only started talking about the abuse a few years ago, when she started reading about the impacts of childhood abuse. Earlier this year, she got a call from Pfau Cochran Vertetis Amala, a Washington-based law firm, that was investigating claims from another of Yang’s victims for a potential suit against Clovis Unified.
She decided to share her story with the attorneys and join the lawsuit.
“I just want other victims to know that they’re not the only ones,” Muñoz said. “It’s OK to talk about it. We need awareness if there’s going to be change.”
This post was originally authored and published by Carolyn Jones from Cal Matters via RSS Feed. Join today to get your news feed on Nationwide Report®.
