One or Two Years?

Much confusion has resulted since CCP Section 335.1 took effect on January 1, 2003 and created a new two year Statute of Limitation in certain tort causes of action. Primarily, there is a spirited legal debate as to whether Section 335.1 applies retroactively. An appellate court has finally taken up this issue and has held that only "9/11" terrorist victims are entitled to the retroactive application of section 335.1.

The debate stems from the legislative history of 335.1. 335.1 is a statutory provision deriving from Senate Bill 688, a bill intended to benefit "9/11" terrorist victims. However, as codified, 335.1 is silent as to whether it applies retroactively.

In Krupnick v. Duke Energy (Feb. 18, 2004, B168117) __ Cal.App.4th __ [2004 D.A.R. 2119] [2004 WL 303098], the Court held that the legislative history "manifests an intent" that 335.1 apply retroactively only to 9/11 terrorist victims. The legislature, the Court held, intended California residents who were "9/11" terrorist victims to have special treatment. (Ibid.) "9/11" terrorists victims residing in California should not be penalized for their state's one year statute of limitations when other states provide a longer period of time to file a claim. (Ibid.) Thus, the Court in Krupnick held, the Legislature expressly singled out only "9/11" terrorist victims as entitled to the retroactive application of section 335.1. (Ibid.)

(Look for the latest update on this issue in the next addition of the SJALA newsletter)