In 1994, Scheffler brought this action against appellants, claiming that he did not characterize the incidents as abuse or know that they had injured him until 1993 when his pastor first labeled the acts as abusive. The trial court denied appellants' motions for summary judgment which were based on the statute of limitations, negligent retention, negligent supervision, and constitutional issues. The case proceeded to the first phase of trial. The trial court denied appellants' motions for a directed verdict and proceeded to the second phase of trial on the issue of punitive damages. Appellants now seek review of the denial of their motions for summary judgment, a directed verdict, and their posttrial motions.
Torts resulting in personal injury are generally subject to a two-year statute of limitations.
If a plaintiff is under the age of 18 when the cause of action accrues, however, the statute of limitations is suspended until one year after the plaintiff reaches the age of majority. The determination of when a reasonable person in a claimant's position should know that he or she has been sexually abused requires an objective inquiry and is normally a fact question for a jury. Summary judgment is appropriate, however, where there is compelling evidence that a reasonable person in the same situation as the complainant should have known that he or she was abused. In Blackowiak II, the plaintiff claimed that in 1970 or 1971, when he was 11 years old, his school counselor sexually abused him. Prior to 1981, he saw several counselors, but was unable to discuss the abuse because he was ashamed.