Opinion ID: 1264793
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 5

Heading: R.B v. Church of God

Text: We must decide whether the claims of E.R.B.'s parents are untimely. E.R.B.'s parents brought claims against Shaw (the alleged abuser), the Local Church, and the New Life Church of God State Offices and Parsonages. The trial court dismissed. The Court of Appeals, Division II, affirmed. E.R.B. v. Church of God, 89 Wash.App. 670, 686, 950 P.2d 29 (1998). We reverse. We find the claims brought by E.R.B.'s parents fall within the ambit of RCW 4.16.340(1). The statute allows any person to bring a claim based on childhood sexual abuse. Commencement of the limitations period is not determined by reference to knowledge possessed by the parents. Rather, it is determined according to knowledge possessed by the child victim. See RCW 4.16.340(1)(b)-(c). The fact that E.R.B.'s parents allegedly had prior knowledge of the abuse is, therefore, irrelevant to the timeliness of their claims. Under the statute, the claims of parents begin to run at the same time as the underlying claims of their child(ren). Although this result may seem unusual, the plain language of the statute controls. Therefore, we reverse the trial court and the Court of Appeals on the timeliness of claims asserted by E.R.B.'s parents.