Latest news with #HouseBill1378
Yahoo
28-04-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Victims, attorneys say new caps on child sex abuse claims in Maryland will make cases not worth pursuing
BALTIMORE — When she was attending Catholic school in Baltimore, Teresa Lancaster would vaguely warn some of her classmates of certain rooms, 'don't go in there.' But it would take decades for her to speak publicly about surviving sexual abuse. Now, as an attorney and advocate for other survivors, she worries that new limits on how much money can come from abuse lawsuits may stop others from coming forward. Lancaster, whose story became the subject of a memoir and part of a Netflix series, argues the changes are a 'calculated' attempt to cheapen 'what our law was supposed to represent.' 'It's a liability discount, is what it is,' she said. Two years ago, Maryland passed the Child Victims Act, which removed the statute of limitations on child sex abuse claims. This year, worried about how those cases could affect the state's budget, lawmakers cut the amount of possible damages by more than half. The changes take effect June 1. A legal crunch has begun, as several civil attorneys dash to beat the filing deadline and consider whether they'll take on similar claims going forward. Some have said they will not. 'These cases, in the future, are not going to be worthwhile pursuing, either for the lawyer or the survivor,' said class action attorney Philip Federico. Based in Baltimore, Federico has cases pending against the archdiocese of Baltimore and Washington, and earlier this month, he helped announce a string of lawsuits against Calvert Hall College High School. In an interview, he said with the new caps, victims won't want to go through the trauma and duration of a lawsuit. 'Those that passed the legislation, at this point, they may as well have just declared the Child Victims act null and void all together,' Federico said. Under House Bill 1378, with sex abuse cases filed after June 1, the state's liability will drop from a potential $890,000 to $400,000. And claims against private institutions, like the archdiocese, will shrink from a $1.15 million ceiling to $700,000. The bill surged through the Maryland General Assembly earlier this month and made it onto the governor's desk in the final days of the 2025 session. Gov. Wes Moore signed the bill on Tuesday. 'Governor Moore acknowledges the trauma survivors of child sexual assault have endured and the difficult and unprecedented circumstances surrounding this legislation,' Senior Press Secretary Brittany Marshall wrote in a statement. 'The General Assembly has carefully crafted legislation that will continue to allow the survivors to seek justice while preserving the long-term fiscal stability of the State.' Lancaster said she missed the bill's first readings in the House of Delegates and caught up with it in the state Senate. She'd prepared an argument, as she had for many other bills over the years, but when she went to testify, she was stopped. The lawmakers would only hear from two people that day. 'It was like a gut punch,' Lancaster said, 'or like somebody dumped cold water on my head.' To make it onto the record, another survivor, who endured years of abuse at a youth detention facility in Baltimore County, quickly jotted down six paragraphs opposing the bill. He said he didn't understand how the legislature was 'giving this very important issue such little attention.' 'This is one of the most significant Bills of this decade,' he wrote. Maryland lawmakers, whose struggles to plug a $3.3 billion deficit defined much of the 2025 legislative session, said the state's coffers could be strained by claims against public institutions, such as the state's juvenile detention centers or the foster care system. Del. C.T. Wilson, a Charles County Democrat who championed the Child Victims Act and sponsored this year's cap bill, said up to 6,000 claims have been made against the state since the first act passed in 2023 — lawsuits that could draw billions of dollars in settlement costs from an already overdrawn budget. That possibility, Wilson said, would carry a heavy toll under any circumstances. 'If we weren't in a deficit, we would still be in the same situation … because of the way the plaintiffs interpreted the law,' he told The Baltimore Sun. A victim of abuse growing up in foster care, Wilson spent years fighting for some form of the Child Victims Act. Early iterations were called the Hidden Predator Act, and Wilson said its purpose was to bring survivors' cases to civil court, where a larger range of admissible evidence could expose attackers previously unchecked. When Wilson started the push, the statute of limitations prevented survivors from filing claims after age 25. In 2017, he was able to change the cutoff to age 38, and in 2023, with the Child Victims Act, the age limit was removed entirely. Now, Wilson said, attorneys 'that want to capitalize on Maryland's pain' have warped the legislation's intent. 'The goal was never about the money,' he said. 'It was about getting in front of a judge so they can say their piece,' he said. In 1994, Lancaster received a letter from an attorney hoping to learn more about attacks at her school, Archbishop Keough High. The chaplain who abused her, Father Joseph Maskell, was eventually accused of assault by dozens of students. But at the time, she said priests 'had a stronghold on the population' and the thought of public allegations 'delighted' her. 'I wanted to get justice. I wanted to expose what was happening, the depth of it,' Lancaster said, adding 'validation' from the courts was a goal for many survivors. But for some clients, like those who grew up in foster care or with run-ins with the law, attorneys said money can be an important and meaningful form of recourse. 'These are not people of means,' said Robin Becker, an attorney with the law firm Andreozzi and Foote. 'They need this recovery. They need these damages.' A former special victims prosecutor in Prince George's County, Becker currently represents clients in claims against county school systems, private schools like Calvert Hall and recreational facilities. She said survivors commonly tell her they want enough money to get themselves or their loved ones through college. 'They don't want to have this kind of generational cycle of problems in the family. They want to be able to make things better,' she said. 'In addition to calling out these perpetrators and naming them for what they are, this money is important to these people and to these families.' Most firms that participate in this kind of litigation do so on a contingency basis, meaning they will not charge a client unless a favorable verdict or settlement is reached. Until then, attorneys may front thousands of dollars in costs, expenditures that go toward building a case, investigating evidence, compiling depositions and preparing expert witnesses. Some lawyers say that prep work and payroll could run $100,000 before fees, which will also be capped under the new law: 25% if a case ends in trial and 20% with a settlement. In a hypothetical claim against a state agency, where the maximum damage amount would be $400,000, a possible settlement could range from around $250,000 to $300,000, lawyers said. In that scenario, an attorney's fees would reach a high of $60,000, and the gap created by out-of-pocket expenses would come from the victim's take. 'Nobody would do that,' Baltimore-based attorney Rob Jenner said. 'That's fiscal irresponsibility, and a law firm could not survive taking on cases like that.' As the Child Victims Act was being drafted, Jenner said he understood caps would be part of the compromise for a 'very conservative jurisdiction' like Maryland — according to the New York Law School, Maryland is one of eight states in the country with damage caps in tort cases. But the new limits, especially in cases involving private entities, 'blindsided' him. He said they will create an influx of cases before June because there will be less time to vet the accusations. That doesn't mean there would be 'unworthy' claims, he said, but that the state will have to spend more money to catch up. 'I know that sounds awkward or unusual, but that's the inside baseball reality to it,' Jenner said. Becker said the five-week crunch could also limit investigations of claims. 'Where we have one victim, there's usually a ton, and so it bars us, the law firm, from being able to follow these leads and look into and find other victims to allow them an opportunity to come forward,' she said. Wilson, a personal injury and defense lawyer as well as a state delegate, said some recent arguments by civil attorneys were 'intellectually dishonest' and an attempt to rush and 'wear the white hats when they stood in silence for years.' Challenging the amount of money and work put into some cases, especially those that go to settlement, he said the idea that firms would stop taking on sex abuse claims with the new caps broke his heart. 'Plenty' of attorneys, he said, would. 'Now, will they make a million dollars per case? No,' Wilson said. 'Should they? Probably not.' -----------------
Yahoo
23-04-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Court likely next stop as overhaul of Child Victims Act is signed into law
A bill that lowers damages for survivors of institutional sex abuse was one of more than 140 bills signed into law by Gov. Wes Moore (D) on Tuesday. (Photo by Bryan P. Sears/Maryland Matters) Lawyers representing men and women who were abused as children while in state custody said newly signed legislation will lead to court challenges and a wave of lawsuits over the next five weeks. Gov. Wes Moore (D) and legislative leaders on Tuesday signed House Bill 1378 into law, which will cut in half potential awards to victims that were promised just two years ago in legislation that was hailed for giving survivors another chance to have their day in court. But that led to claims by thousands of men and women who were sexually abused while in state custody, opening the door to potentially budget-crushing financial awards and sparking the rush to pass HB1378, which takes effect June 1. D. Todd Mathews, an attorney with Bailey & Glasser, said his firm would be part of a challenge to the new law. 'We will vigorously oppose this clearly unconstitutional bill, in order to protect the Survivors, as the State and Governor Moore have clearly failed them,' Mathews said in an email. Washington, D.C.-based Bailey & Glasser is one of nearly two dozen firms representing more than 4,500 plaintiffs. The coalition of firms has been in active negotiations with the Maryland Attorney General's office since 2023. Mathews and Ryan S. Perlin, an attorney at Baltimore-based Bekman, Marder, Hopper, Malarkey & Perlin, said the newly signed law could face several potential constitutional challenges. 'It's all but a certainty that this will be challenged,' Perlin said Tuesday morning. With a June 1 effective date, survivors have until May 31 to file a lawsuit under the old law, which caps damages at $1.5 million per occurrence for private institutions and $890,000 per occurrence against government entities. On June 1, those caps fall to $700,000 and $400,000, respectively. SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE Perlin said those reductions, as well as the five-week filing window, will likely be challenged, along with the difference in how the law treats lawsuits against private and public institutions. The bill also caps the fees that can be paid to attorneys representing survivors. 'That will have a chilling effect, making it harder for survivors to find a lawyer who will represent them,' said Perlin, whose firm announced last week that it had filed a new group of lawsuits against Towson-based Calvert Hall College High School under the current law The bill was one of 142 signed into law at the second ceremony following the 2025 session. That second tranche of new laws included bills affecting expungement of criminal records, the Second Look Act and legislation to aid federal workers whose jobs have been eliminated by President Donald Trump. Moore did not comment on the Child Victims Act changes during remarks delivered before the bill signing. When asked for comment, a spokesperson for the office repeated a statement from last week, that 'acknowledged the trauma' survivors have faced, but said the bill would 'continue to allow the survivors to seek justice while preserving the long-term fiscal stability of the state.'' Lisae Jordan, executive director and counsel at Maryland Coalition Against Sexual Assault, said she hoped the state would make more services available to people who were abused in state facilities. 'House Bill 1378 will save the state a lot of money, but it remains to be seen whether some of the savings will be used to help prevent future abuse or to provide services for survivors who can't prove their case in court,' Jordan said in an email. 'Helping people who were sexually abused while in state custody doesn't require a lawsuit, but it will require more resources.' The muted comment at Tuesday's signing was a vastly different affair than two years ago when Moore praised passage of the Child Victims Act and throngs of survivors traveled to Annapolis for the bill signing. That 2023 law eliminated time restrictions during which survivors of institutional sexual abuse had to file lawsuits. It also set the $1.5 million and $890,000 caps on awards per 'occurrence' of abuse — a term over which plaintiff's attorneys and some lawmakers disagree. At the time, the focus was on the substantial number of cases expected to arise out of the Catholic church sex abuse scandal, and the Archdiocese of Baltimore filed for bankruptcy protection in advance of the 2023 law taking effect. At the same time, hundreds of cases against the state, including the Department of Juvenile Services, began to surface. Lawmakers were warned in January of billions in potential liabilities from an estimated 3,500 cases. Those alone would have dire budgetary consequences. Since then, a coalition of attorneys has said they have nearly 6,000 cases. And those cases are believed to be just the start. Two weeks ago, Levy Konigsberg, a New York-based law firm that is part of the coalition, filed lawsuits on behalf of 221 men and women in connection with sexual abuse allegations at 15 state juvenile detention facilities. The lawsuits bring the number of claims handled by Levy Konigsberg alone to roughly 2,000, according to the firm. Del. C.T. Wilson (D-Charles), who sponsored the 2023 bill, stepped in to author the changes in HB1378, which he called an attempt to ease the potential financial burden to the state while giving survivors the opportunity to seek justice. 'This bill does nothing to change the amounts [government] is going to pay out,' said Perlin, who said lawyers will rush 'thousands of cases' to the courthouses in the next five weeks in order to come in under the current, higher caps. That rush of cases could potentially slow the judicial system and its existing workload of criminal and civil cases to a crawl. It is likely that victims' claims and legal challenges to the new law will move simultaneously. Lawyers could seek a temporary injunction before the end of May, to put the law on hold while courts determine its constitutionality; or attorneys representing the survivors could hold off on a challenge until June 1, when the new law takes effect. A third scenario would bring a challenge to the law after survivors start appealing the resolution of individual cases, according to Perlin. Mathews agreed, adding that scenario could take years to resolve.
Yahoo
15-04-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Moore rejects call for veto as wave of sex abuse cases head to the courthouse
Attorney Robert K. Jenner holds a copy of House Bill 1378, passed last week, that reduces the financial awards for victims of institutional child sex abuse. Jenner called on Gov. Wes Moore to veto the bill, but the governor's office said he will sign it in the coming weeks. (Photo by Bryan P. Sears/Maryland Matters) A group of lawyers is urging Gov. Wes Moore (D) to veto legislation that reduces the financial awards to victims of institutional abuse — but also rushing other claims to court before a May 31 deadline in case he signs it. The call for a veto came as those same attorneys announced nearly two dozen new lawsuits Monday against one Catholic high school in Baltimore County. Robert K. Jenner, managing partner at Baltimore-based Jenner Law, called on Moore to reject the bill that was rushed through the final days of the 2025 Maryland General Assembly session. 'It breaks the faith with the thousands of survivors who have come forward believing that the state of Maryland was on their side and ready to hold perpetrators accountable,' said Jenner, one of roughly a half-dozen attorneys who spoke during a news conference at his firm's Baltimore office. But a Moore spokesperson said Monday that while the governor 'acknowledges the trauma survivors of child sexual assault have endured and the difficult and unprecedented circumstances surrounding this legislation,' a veto is off the table. 'The General Assembly has carefully crafted legislation that will continue to allow the survivors to seek justice while preserving the long-term fiscal stability of the state,' the spokesperson said in an emai. 'The governor will sign this legislation.' House Bill 1378 passed both the House and Senate by veto-proof majorities. While the attorneys decried the passage of House Bill 1378 , they said they are not waiting for Moore to veto the bill. The attorneys — part of a coalition calling themselves the Calvert Hall Lawyers Working Group — announced roughly two dozen new lawsuits against Towson-based Calvert Hall College High School. Emily C. Malarkey, a partner at Baltimore-based Bekman, Marder, Hopper, Malarkey & Perlin, said the new lawsuits represent what could potentially be a rush to file before the new law — with its lower caps on damages — takes effect. 'We're working 24/7, for the next six weeks to get all our clients' cases filed,' Malarkey said in an interview. 'If we wait until June 1, their cap is going to drop in half, and we're not going to do that to them. We're going to work our butts off to get it done.' Jenner praised the 2023 law, sponsored by Del. C.T. Wilson (D-Charles) as well as a Supreme Court of Maryland ruling this year that held the law was constitutional. Wilson also sponsored HB1378, out of concern that potential settlements under the 2023 law could bust the state budget. It's legislation that Jenner and other attorneys opposed. 'Finally, we thought we had a path to justice but here we are. A landmark victory for survivors that we thought ended the question has now been gutted. But this isn't about budget math. This is about moral clarity. This is about a promise that the state of Maryland made and is now poised to break,' Jenner said. The 2025 bill as passed 'slashes the amount survivors can recover by jury, verdict or by settlement, and it limits them to a single payment when they have been abused several times, multiple times by the same perpetrator,' he said. Malarkey's firm on Monday filed a lawsuit on behalf of 14 clients against Towson-based Calvert Hall College High School. The lawsuit also names as defendants the Brothers of the Christian Schools, District of Eastern North America, and the Christian Brothers of Frederick. Both entities were responsible for managing and operating Calvert Hall. The 45-page filing includes allegations of abuse against four members of the clergy — Brother Geoffrey Xavier Langan and the Revs. Laurence Brett, Jerome Toohey and Francis LeFevre. All four were named in a 463-page report on child sexual abuse in the Archdiocese of Baltimore released in 2023 by the Office of the Attorney General. Stephen E. Arnold, a lay science instructor at Calvert Hall is also named as an abuser in the lawsuit filed Monday. The claims filed Monday would come in under the current law, which said victims of abuse in private institutions could file a lawsuit at any time, and capped damages at $1.5 million per 'occurrence' — a term over which plaintiff's attorneys and some lawmakers disagree. For state and local government entities, the cap was set at $890,000 per occurrence. Assuming Moore makes good on his promise to sign HB1378 into law, claims filed after June 1 would be capped at $700,000 for private institutions and $400,000 for public institutions The changes came after legislative analysts warned of the potential 'enormous liability' stemming from claims against state institutions. Those analysts said in January that there could be as many as 3,500 claims. And while they did not provide a potential price tag, conservative estimates initially set the amount at about $3.1 billion — an amount roughly equal to the structural budget deficit. The actual amount of potential liability is not fully known. The Child Victim's Act, passed in 2023, was the result of a decade of effort to allow victims — who were children at the time they were assaulted — to file lawsuits that were otherwise time-barred. At the time, most of the focus was on survivors of abuse who made allegations against the Catholic Church. The bill was praised at the time by Moore and Attorney General Anthony Brown (D). But the potential for liabilities grew as attorneys for those with claims argued that 'per occurrence' meant each individual instance of sexual assault. Others argued for a more conservative definition that would combine assaults based on other factors. The result would be a reduction of the total amount a jury could potentially award. The Archdiocese of Baltimore quickly sought bankruptcy protection before the law could take effect in October 2023. At the same time, cases against the state were also making their way to the courthouse. One group of attorneys earlier this year told Maryland Matters they were representing roughly 4,500 claimants. If each one had just one claim of abuse and received the maximum award, the potential liability to the state is an estimated $4 billion. 'I could have never comprehended 4,500 claimants, and it's an open door with another 1,500 in the hopper,' Wilson said in an interview earlier this year. He wondered aloud about 'how much are taxpayers going to be on the hook for this?' Those attorneys said many clients have more than one allegation of abuse. They also said that they have been in settlement discussions with the attorney general's office. Those attorneys declined to provide details on the amount they were seeking, but said it was less than even what legislative analysts hinted at in January. The Maryland attorneys are not the first to move cases to the courthouse. Levy Konigsberg, a New York-based law firm, filed lawsuits on behalf of 221 men and women the day after Maryland lawmakers adjourned the 2025 legislative session. All of the cases focus on allegations of sexual abuse at 15 state juvenile detention facilities. The lawsuits bring the number of claims to roughly 2,000, according to the firm. Levy Konigsberg represents about 1,000 people who allege they were sexually abused while in state custody. SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
Yahoo
05-04-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Senate panel holds hearing on bill to limit state's exposure to sex abuse claims
David Lorenz, the Maryland director of the Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests, also called SNAP, talks about his opposition to a bill that would limit claims from sex abuse cases. (Photo by William J. Ford/Maryland Matters) Critics told a Senate panel Friday that a bill aimed at protecting the state from billions in potential sex abuse claims is ill-advised and being rushed through in the waning days of the legislature. The comments came during a hearing by the Judicial Proceedings Committee on House Bill 1378, which just passed the House on Thursday and could be before the full Senate as early as Saturday. Legislative leaders are rushing to beat the final day of the 2025 session on Monday. 'This is a really, really important piece of legislation. It is terrible that it's being handled in such a quick way at the end of the session with two people speaking,' said Tom Yost, a Baltimore attorney with clients who said they were sexually abused as children while in state custody. Corey Stern, the other witness against the bill, said it is likely unconstitutional. 'It is well settled under Maryland law that plaintiffs have a vested right in an accrued cause of action,. whether it's based on statute or common law,' said Stern, an attorney with Levy Konigsberg, which is representing child sexual abuse clients. 'The minute that Gov. Moore signed the bill into law, those rights vested for individuals who have been sexually abused.' The law he's referring to is the 2023 Child Victims Act that removed time limits on lawsuits by survivors of child sexual abuse against the institutions that employed their abusers. The law capped awards for such suits at $890,000 for public institutions, like state agencies, and $1.5 million for private institutions, like the Catholic Church or scouting organizations. Thousands of claimants, representing a potentially budget-busting bilions in payouts, have since lined up against the state alone for abuse they suffered while children in state care. Del. C.T. Wilson (D-Charles), himself a survivor of childhood physical and sexual abuse, had pushed for years for the Child Victims Act before winning it in 2023. But when the budget implications became clear, he introduced HB1378 a month into this year's session. The bill would lower the cap on lawsuits filed after June 1, from $890,000 to $400,000 for public institutions and from $1.5 million to $700,000 for private institutions. It also narrows the scope of the term 'incident' so that all crimes by one abuser against one victim would count as one incident, rather than one incident for every separate assault. The bill would also cap fees for attorneys at 20% for cases that settle out of court and 25% for cases that result from a court judgment. Now lawmakers are racing the clock to pass the measure, with the time left in the legislative session being measured now in hours instead of days. Del. Luke Clippinger (D-Baltimore City), chair of the House Judiciary Committee, who testified Friday on behalf of Wilson, said about 1,500 lawsuits have been filed so far and another 4,000 cases are waiting to go forward. He said it's unclear how many are against public or private entities and when they would be filed. 'We're at a situation, we're at a point where I believe and the House believes that it's important for us to begin to figure out how many of these claims are out there,' he said. Sen. Jeff Waldstreicher (D-Montgomery), vice chair of the Judicial Proceedings Committee, asked Clippinger if a suit was filed by May 31 and amended after June 1, would the suit still be eligible for any possible payments from the current law. 'I believe the rules relating to the claims initially put in would hold,' said Clippinger, who added he's a criminal attorney and not a civil lawyer. David Lorenz, the Maryland director of the Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests, also known as SNAP, attended Friday's hearing but was not invited to testify, as the committee limited witnesses to keep the process moving along. He said that decreasing the cap amounts will also decrease the number of people who 'would be otherwise willing to come and speak out against the abuse they endured,' at a time when what we need is 'more accountability against these abusers.' Sen. William G. Folden (R-Frederick) said Friday night the proposed bill seeks to do two things. 'I think what this bill is trying to do is find a balance between allowing those that have been victimized to have some sense of relief for their continued treatment,' he said. 'But also have a balance that we're already in a fiscal crisis to cause additional irrecoverable financial strains on the state.'
Yahoo
02-04-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Committee set to vote on lower limits on child sex abuse lawsuits
House Judiciary Chair Luke Clippinger (D-Baltimore City) said the amended bill on child sexual abuse claims is "fairly close to being a place where I don't know that everybody's totally happy or totally unhappy, which is ... our goal from time to time." (File Photo by Bryan P. Sears/Maryland Matters) The House Judiciary Committee is set to vote Wednesday on an amended version of a bill that could limit the state's financial liability stemming from claims of institutional abuse. The amendments to House Bill 1378 would lower the maximum payout claims for thousands of plaintiffs who said they were abused as children while in state custody. Del. C.T. Wilson (D-Charles), who sponsored the 2023 law that first opened the door to the lawsuits as well as this year's bill to contain them, said he backs the changes. 'I think it strikes a good balance, without a doubt,' Wilson said. 'We are kind of fishing for ways to do it — what's best, what's constitutional? I think we came up with a very good balance. I think it allows the plaintiffs to keep going. So, yeah, I think that it does definitely strike a good balance.' But the bill, which had a hearing in the House Judiciary Committee last week, faces a tight deadline for passage. The General Assembly ends its work at midnight, April 7. The bill must get out of the House Judiciary and through a preliminary and final vote by the full House of Delegates, before beginning again in the Senate. Sources said passing the bill this year gets tougher if it's not in the Senate by Thursday. The subject matter of the bill is emotionally charged. That and concerns about potential litigation could attract lengthy committee and floor debates. Budget-hawk Republicans on the committee worried the amended bill focuses on limiting the costs to the state rather than focusing on the victims. 'It seems what we're doing right now is we're saying, 'How can we protect the state and the budget?'' Del. Robin L. Grammer Jr. (R-Baltimore County), said during a Judiciary Committee meeting Tuesday. 'I'm not sure how a different level of justice for public versus private makes these people whole,' Grammer said. 'And in this moment, it very much seems like we're not thinking of these folks. We're actually saying, 'What are we going to do about the budget?' So, I just don't feel comfortable with this at all.' The Child Victims Act, passed in 2023, made it easier for adults who were sexually abused as children to sue the institutions that protected their alleged abusers. The bill eliminated time restrictions on filing lawsuits both against private institutions but also state and local governments. That law also capped claims against private institutions at $1.5 million per occurrence. Claims against public institutions – state and local government agencies – are capped at $890,000 per occurrence. One group of lawyers claiming to represent 5,000 plaintiffs has been in negotiations with the state since 2023 with claims under that law. The total potential liability for those claims has not been made public but could easily be in the billions. Wilson said he filed this year's bill in an attempt to reconcile the need for survivors to bring their cases to court, while addressing the unintended, potentially bankrupting consequences facing the Maryland government. His bill would have lowered the cap on claims against the state from $890,000 to $400,000. Additionally, it proposed limiting payouts to an individual claimant regardless of the number of alleged instances of abuse. SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE The amended bill changes the maximum payout for cases against public and private institutions beginning June 1. Claims filed before the effective date would be subject to the current law. Claims against private institutions, such as private schools or religious institutions, would be capped at $700,000. Claims against government agencies would be capped at $400,000. The amendments also eliminate the 'per occurrence' multiplier that exposes the state to billions in potential liabilities. Similar claims forced the Archdiocese of Baltimore to preemptively seek bankruptcy protection before the 2023 law took effect. Should the amended bill pass, 'all of the different occurrences would be happening under one umbrella,' said House Judiciary Committee Chair Luke Clippinger (D-Baltimore City). Maximum payouts under that 'umbrella' would be limited to $700,000 or $400,000 total. Del. Lauren Arikan (R-Harford), speaking during a committee meeting, said the lower cap was too low. 'Six thousand dollars a year is offensively low given these children could not escape their abusers,' Arikan said, basing her estimates on a boy abused as a teen who lives to the average life expectancy for a male. Attorney's fees in such cases would also be limited — 20% for out of court settlements and 25% if the case goes to court. The amended bill asks the state judiciary to adopt rules to handle the influx of cases. 'In other words, basically signaling to them: Hey, you're going to have a number of cases. You should probably look to get together and draft rules,' Clippinger said. The bill asks the court system to provide the legislature with an annual report on resolved cases, including the amounts paid out and a summary of the underlying claims in each case. One of the most problematic portions of the bill as introduced was language that placed limits on damages retrospectively. Initially, lawmakers said they received assurances from Attorney General Anthony Brown that the change would be legal. But the decision to strike the retroactive language in spite of those assurances indicates they were less certain about those claims. 'I've heard a lot from a lot of different people over the last week,' Clippinger said. 'I think that is fairly close to being a place where I don't know that everybody's totally happy or totally unhappy, which is, as has been stated, our goal from time to time.'
