ILLINOIS
CHILD SEX ABUSE SOLs
CURRENT CIVIL SOL
There is no civil SOL for CSA, trafficking, or CSAM claims against any defendants.
CIVIL SOL SNAPSHOT
AGE CAP | CSA: NONE TRAFFICKING: NONE CSAM: NONE |
REVIVAL LAW | NONE |
DISCOVERY TOLLING | NONE |
Civil SOL History
| Age Cap | |
| 2002 | Age 20 (age of majority, 18, plus 2 years) SOL for CSA and CSAM.[i] |
| 2003 | Extended the SOL to age 28 (age of majority, 18, plus 10 years).[ii] |
| 2010 | Extended the SOL to age 38 (age of majority, 18, plus 20 years) and included trafficking.[iii] |
| 2014 | Eliminated the civil SOL.[iv] |
| Revival Law | |
| N/A | No window; previous SOL revival law was found unconstitutional in 2009.[v] |
| Discovery | |
| Common Law | Illinois has a common law discovery rule, and in 1988 recognized it could toll the 2-year SOL for a victim of CSA who repressed memories of the abuse and later remembered them.[vi] |
| Statutory | In 1991, the Illinois legislature codified the 2-year common law discovery rule with a statute, but added an upper limit of age 30.[vii] The statute provides that the SOL runs from “the date the person abused discovers or through the use of reasonable diligence should discover that the act of childhood sexual abuse occurred and that the injury was caused by the childhood sexual abuse.”[viii] In 1994, the discovery statute’s upper limit was removed, and the only discovery claims that were blocked were those by survivors who turned 30 before 1994.[ix] In 2003, the State extended the statutory discovery rule to 5 years, and then extended it again in 2010 to 20 years. It also added that discovery of the abuse alone does not start the clock on the discovery SOL.[x] The discovery rule is applicable to claims against any type of defendant — including individuals, institutions,[xi] and the government.[xii] In 2014, Illinois eliminated its civil SOL for CSA claims, which also did away with its statutory discovery rule.[xiii] |
[i] 735 Ill. Comp. Stat. 5/13-202.2 (2002) (CSA SOL), 720 Ill. Comp. Stat. 5/11-20.1 (child pornography). See People v. Hollins, 971 N.E.2d 504, 509 (Ill. 2012) (citing People v. Greer, 522 N.E.2d 1200 (Ill. 1988)) (finding CSAM offenses under the child pornography statute to be a form of sexual abuse and exploitation).
[ii] Id. at 5/13-202.2 (2003) (CSA SOL).
[iii] Id. (2010) (CSA SOL), 720 Ill. Comp. Stat. 5/10-9 (2010) (human trafficking).
[iv] Id. at 5/13-202.2 (2014) (CSA SOL).
[v] Doe A. v. Diocese of Dallas, 917 N.E.2d 475, 486 (Ill. 2009) (finding that “once a claim is time-barred, it cannot be revived through subsequent legislative action without offending the due process protections of our state’s constitution.”).
[vi] Johnson v. Johnson, 701 F. Supp. 1363, 1370 (N.D. Ill. 1988). See also Horn v. Goodman, 60 N.E.3d 922, 926 (Ill. App. Ct. 2016) (citing Parks v. Kownacki, 737 N.E.2d 287 (Ill. 2000)) (quoting Knox College v. Celotex Corp., 430 N.E.2d 976 (Ill. 1981)). But see M.E.H. v. L.H., 669 N.E.2d 1228, 1236 (Ill. App. Ct. 1996) (declining to apply the discovery rule to case of repressed memory of abuse), aff’d, 685 N.E.2d 335 (Ill. 1997).
[vii] 735 Ill. Comp. Stat. 5/13-202.2 (1991).
[viii] Id. See Coe v. Cmty. High Sch. Dist. 99, No. 2-21-0047, 2021 WL 4950250, at *3 (Ill. App. Ct. Oct. 25, 2021) (affirming motion to dismiss on grounds that statutory discovery rule in effect in 1998 did not toll the SOL because plaintiff was somewhat aware of the abuse when it occurred), appeal denied, 184 N.E.3d 1004 (Table) (Ill. 2022).
[ix] 735 Ill. Comp. Stat. 5/13-202.2 (1994). See also Doe v. Boy Scouts of Am., 66 N.E.3d 433, 455 (Ill. App. Ct. 2016) (finding that “the 12–year statute of repose included in the 1991 version of the childhood sexual abuse statute would apply to plaintiff’s claim only if he had turned 30 years old before 1994.”) (citing Diocese of Dallas, supra note 311, at 485).
[x] 735 Ill. Comp. Stat. 5/13-202.2.
[xi] Doe v. Hinsdale Twp. High Sch. Dist. 86, 905 N.E.2d 343, 346–47 (Ill. App. Ct. 2009) (concluding that the discovery “statute applies to both child abusers and those who had a duty to protect a child from abuse”); Doe v. Boy Scouts of Am., 66 N.E.3d 433, 455 (Ill. App. Ct. 2016); Horn v. Goodman, 60 N.E.3d 922, 928 (Ill. App. Ct. 2016).
[xii] Hinsdale, supra note 317 at 348–9 (finding that the discovery statute applies to municipal entities and that the Tort Immunity Act is inapplicable); Brookman ex rel. A.B. v. Reed-Custer Cmty. Unit, Sch. Dist. 255-U, No. 18 C 7836, 2019 WL 4735395, at *3 (N.D. Ill. Sept. 27, 2019) (supporting the Hinsdale holding).
[xiii] 735 Ill. Comp. Stat. 5/13-202.2.
CURRENT ILLINOIS CIVIL LAW
735 Ill. Comp. Stat. 5/13-202.2 - Childhood sexual abuse
(a) In this Section:
“Childhood sexual abuse” means an act of sexual abuse that occurs when the person abused is under 18 years of age.
“Sexual abuse” includes but is not limited to sexual conduct and sexual penetration as defined in Section 11-0.1 of the Criminal Code of 2012.
(b) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, an action for damages for personal injury based on childhood sexual abuse must be commenced within 20 years of the date the limitation period begins to run under subsection (d) or within 20 years of the date the person abused discovers or through the use of reasonable diligence should discover both (i) that the act of childhood sexual abuse occurred and (ii) that the injury was caused by the childhood sexual abuse. The fact that the person abused discovers or through the use of reasonable diligence should discover that the act of childhood sexual abuse occurred is not, by itself, sufficient to start the discovery period under this subsection (b). Knowledge of the abuse does not constitute discovery of the injury or the causal relationship between any later-discovered injury and the abuse.
(c) If the injury is caused by 2 or more acts of childhood sexual abuse that are part of a continuing series of acts of childhood sexual abuse by the same abuser, then the discovery period under subsection (b) shall be computed from the date the person abused discovers or through the use of reasonable diligence should discover both (i) that the last act of childhood sexual abuse in the continuing series occurred and (ii) that the injury was caused by any act of childhood sexual abuse in the continuing series. The fact that the person abused discovers or through the use of reasonable diligence should discover that the last act of childhood sexual abuse in the continuing series occurred is not, by itself, sufficient to start the discovery period under subsection (b). Knowledge of the abuse does not constitute discovery of the injury or the causal relationship between any later-discovered injury and the abuse.
(d) The limitation periods under subsection (b) do not begin to run before the person abused attains the age of 18 years; and, if at the time the person abused attains the age of 18 years he or she is under other legal disability, the limitation periods under subsection (b) do not begin to run until the removal of the disability.
(d-1) The limitation periods in subsection (b) do not run during a time period when the person abused is subject to threats, intimidation, manipulation, fraudulent concealment, or fraud perpetrated by the abuser or by any person acting in the interest of the abuser.
(e) This Section applies to actions pending on the effective date of this amendatory Act of 1990 as well as to actions commenced on or after that date. The changes made by this amendatory Act of 1993 shall apply only to actions commenced on or after the effective date of this amendatory Act of 1993. The changes made by this amendatory Act of the 93rd General Assembly apply to actions pending on the effective date of this amendatory Act of the 93rd General Assembly as well as actions commenced on or after that date. The changes made by this amendatory Act of the 96th General Assembly apply to actions commenced on or after the effective date of this amendatory Act of the 96th General Assembly if the action would not have been time barred under any statute of limitations or statute of repose prior to the effective date of this amendatory Act of the 96th General Assembly.
(f) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, an action for damages based on childhood sexual abuse may be commenced at any time; provided, however, that the changes made by this amendatory Act of the 98th General Assembly apply to actions commenced on or after the effective date of this amendatory Act of the 98th General Assembly if the action would not have been time barred under any statute of limitations or statute of repose prior to the effective date of this amendatory Act of the 98th General Assembly.
Case law
CURRENT CRIMINAL SOL
CSA: There is no SOL for felony and misdemeanor sex offenses committed against children.
Trafficking: The SOL for trafficking is age 43.
CSAM: There is no SOL for creating child pornography. Lesser CSAM offenses have an SOL of age 19 or 3 years from the offense, whichever is later.
CRIMINAL SOL SNAPSHOT
CSA | NO SOL |
TRAFFICKING | AGE 43 |
CSAM | NO SOL |
Criminal SOL History
| Age Cap | |
| 2002 | Age 28 with an exception that felony and misdemeanor sexual offenses can be prosecuted at any time if there is DNA evidence and it was reported to law enforcement within 2 years.[i] |
| 2003 | Extended to age 38 for CSA felonies.[ii] |
| 2008 | Extended the time for reporting to 3 years for the DNA statute.[iii] |
| 2009 | Eliminated the SOL for child pornography and added an SOL of age 28 for CSA misdemeanor crimes.[iv] |
| 2014 | Eliminated the SOL for felony sex offenses against children, but only if there was corroborating evidence or an individual with responsibility to report the abuse failed to do so.[v] |
| 2017 | Removed the evidentiary limitations for SOL elimination for felony sex offenses against children.[vi] Extended the SOL for sex trafficking to age 43, but the SOL for soliciting a child for sex remained at age 19 or 3 years from the offense, whichever is later.[vii] |
| 2019 | Eliminated the SOL for many sex abuse crimes that involve sexual conduct or sexual penetration, including misdemeanor criminal sexual abuse.[viii] |
[i] Id. at 5/3-5 (2002) (no SOL) & 5/3-6(j) (2002) (no SOL).
[ii] Id. at 5/3-5 (2003) (no SOL) & 5/3-6(j) (2003) (no SOL).
[iii] Id. at 5/3-5 (2008) (no SOL) & 5/3-6(j) (2008) (no SOL).
[iv] Id. at 5/3-5 (2009) (no SOL) & 5/3-6(j) (2009) (no SOL).
[v] Id. at 5/3-5 (2014) (no SOL) & 5/3-6(j) (2014) (no SOL). In 2014, a one-year discovery rule was added for offenses involving unauthorized video recordings and live video transmissions in violation of section 5/26-4.
[vi] Id. at 5/3-5 (2017) (no SOL) & 5/3-6(j) (2017) (no SOL).
[vii] Id. at 5/3-5 (2017) (no SOL) & 5/3-6(j) (2017) (no SOL).
[viii] Id. at 5/3-5 (2019) (no SOL).
CURRENT ILLINOIS CRIMINAL LAW
720 Ill. Comp. Stat. 5/3-5 - General limitations
Case Law
The information provided is solely for informational purposes and is not legal advice. To determine the Illinois SOL in a particular case, contact a lawyer in the state.
Last Updated: November 30, 2023