HC LS RT and TK v. James Nesmith

In this amicus brief, CHILD USA argues that The Justice for Vulnerable Victims of Sexual Abuse Act comports with Arkansas' Due Process Clause and is consistent with the national trend to permit revival of previously time-barred claims. [pdf_embed...

GILCHRIST v. OLVER

CHILD USA filed this brief in support of Plaintiff-Appellant that this Court should reverse the lower court’s decision and permit Plaintiff to proceed with her claim under the revival window opened by the New York Child Victims Act ("CVA"). Here, CHILD USA argues that...

Gonzalez, et al. v. Google LLC

CHILD USA filed this brief in support of petitioners' appeal to the Supreme Court of the United States. Here, CHILD USA argues that this Court should interpret Section 230 consistent with its text and child safety purpose to avoid further injustice and to give victims...

Spencer Elden v. Nirvana, L.L.C., et al.

CHILD USA filed this brief in the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit in support of plaintiff-appellant's appeal for reversal of the District Court's dismissal. Here, CHILD USA argues that the District Court's interpretation of Masha's Law is not...

Doe v. Ariz. Bd. of Regents, et al.

CHILD USA filed this brief support of Plaintiff's appeal to the Arizona Supreme Court. Here, CHILD USA argues that neither Arizona's Window Legislation nor the Notice Statute require victims of child sexual abuse with revived claims against public entities to comply...

Fleming v. Amateur Athletic Union of the United States, Inc.

CHILD USA filed this brief in the Wisconsin Supreme Court in support of Plaintiff-Appellant. Here, CHILD USA considers the legislative history and historical context for Wisconsin's 2003 SOL extension law to support the lower court's ruling that the SOL extension...

Bernard Musumeci v. State of New York

CHILD USA wrote this brief denouncing a Court of Claims decision that dismissed Plaintiff's CVA claims for failing to plead with specificity each incident of abuse among other things. CHILD USA explains why the Court of Claims decision is inconsistent with the science...