Summary

Track

Status

Governing provision

Criminal Partly removed N.J. Stat. Ann. § 2C:1-6(a)(1), (b)(4); State v. Rosado, 475 N.J. Super. 266 (App. Div. 2023)
Civil Deadline applies N.J.S.A. 2A:14-2a(a)(1)
Civil Revival Window closed N.J.S.A. 2A:14-2b (P.L. 2019, c. 120, § 9)

Statutory text verified against primary sources; every link checked and confirmed working 5 September 2026.

Criminal - prosecuting

Status Partly removed
Citation N.J. Stat. Ann. § 2C:1-6 (Time limitations), eff. Aug. 6, 2007; L.1978, c. 95 … L.2007, c. 131, § 1. State v. Rosado, 475 N.J. Super. 266, 292 A.3d 522 (App. Div. 29 Mar. 2023)
The rule

No limitation for the top offenses — § 2C:1-6(a)(1): “A prosecution for any offense set forth in N.J.S.2C:11-3, N.J.S.2C:11-4, N.J.S.2C:14-2 or sections 1 through 5 of P.L.2002, c. 26 (C.2C:38-1 through C.2C:38-5) may be commenced at any time.” N.J.S. 2C:14-2 is aggravated sexual assault and sexual assault; 2C:11-3 and 2C:11-4 are murder and manslaughter. 

BUT A DEADLINE FOR THE NEXT TIER — § 2C:1-6(b)(4): “A prosecution for an offense set forth in N.J.S.2C:14-3 or N.J.S.2C:24-4, when the victim at the time of the offense is below the age of 18 years, must be commenced within five years of the victim’s attaining the age of 18 or within two years of the discovery of the offense by the victim, whichever is later.” N.J.S. 2C:14-3 is aggravated criminal sexual contact and criminal sexual contact; 2C:24-4 is endangering the welfare of a child. The ordinary deadline is therefore the survivor’s twenty-third birthday. 

The general periods — § 2C:1-6(b)(1): five years for a crime. § 2C:1-6(b)(2): one year for a disorderly persons or petty disorderly persons offense. 

DNA and fingerprint delay — § 2C:1-6(c): time does not start to run “when the prosecution is supported by physical evidence that identifies the actor by means of DNA testing or fingerprint analysis” until the State holds both the physical evidence and the identifying evidence. 

That DNA provision does not reach back. State v. Rosado holds that the 2002 amendment adding the DNA-tolling language in § 2C:1-6(c) does not apply retroactively to a limitations period that had already expired, and that applying it to revive a prosecution for a 1990 sexual assault would violate the federal and New Jersey ex post facto clauses. The court’s formulation: one cannot toll something that has already expired. The conviction was reversed and the charge ordered dismissed with prejudice. 

Fleeing and pending prosecutions — § 2C:1-6(e) and (f): the period does not run while a prosecution for the same conduct is pending in the State, and the limitations “shall not apply to any person fleeing from justice.”

Sources

N.J. Stat. Ann. § 2C:1-6 — free full text 

State v. Rosado, No. A-0516-22 (N.J. Super. App. Div. 29 Mar. 2023) — full opinion, free

Civil - suing

Status Deadline applies
Citation N.J.S.A. 2A:14-2a (P.L. 2019, c. 120, § 2), eff. Dec. 1, 2019
The rule

The child rule — § 2A:14-2a(a)(1): “Every action at law for an injury resulting from the commission of sexual assault, any other crime of a sexual nature, a prohibited sexual act as defined in section 2 of P.L.1992, c.7 (C.2A:30B-2), or sexual abuse as defined in section 1 of P.L.1992, c.109 (C.2A:61B-1) against a minor under the age of 18 that occurred prior to, on or after the effective date of P.L.2019, c.120 (C.2A:14-2a et al.) shall be commenced within 37 years after the minor reaches the age of majority, or within seven years from the date of reasonable discovery of the injury and its causal relationship to the act, whichever date is later.” The ordinary deadline is the survivor’s fifty-fifth birthday. 

The adult rule — § 2A:14-2a(b)(1): for abuse of a person eighteen or older, “within seven years from the date of reasonable discovery of the injury and its causal relationship to the act.” 

The extension itself reaches backwards. The words “prior to, on or after the effective date” make the new period apply to acts committed before 1 December 2019 — a retroactive extension, not merely a prospective one. The Senate Judiciary Committee statement printed with the section puts it plainly: any child victim of past abuse under fifty-five when the bill took effect, or who reaches fifty-five afterwards, and who is aware of the injury and its cause, could file. 

Equitable tolling is preserved — § 2A:14-2a: “Nothing in this section is intended to preclude the court from finding that the statute of limitations was tolled in an action because of the plaintiff’s mental state, physical or mental disability, duress by the defendant, or any other equitable grounds. Such a finding shall be made after a plenary hearing.” The discovery date is determined at a Lopez hearing (Lopez v. Swyer, 62 N.J. 267 (1973); R.L. v. Voytac, 199 N.J. 285 (2009)). 

No class actions — § 2A:14-2a(c)(1) requires every action under the section to proceed on an individual basis, and (c)(2) voids any private contractual arrangement settling such claims on a class basis as against public policy. 

The 2019 Act did more than move the date. It amended the Charitable Immunity Act (P.L. 1959, c. 90, § 1, C.2A:53A-7(c)) to state expressly that nonprofit religious, charitable, educational and hospital organizations are liable for willful, wanton or grossly negligent acts including sexual abuse; made the negligent hiring, supervision and retention exception (P.L. 2005, c. 264) apply retroactively; made public entities liable notwithstanding the Tort Claims Act (C.59:2-1.3); and disapplied the Tort Claims Act’s notice and two-year requirements (N.J.S. 59:8-3(b)). 

Fifty-five is the longest fixed civil deadline in this dataset outside the states that have removed the deadline altogether, and it is retroactive. A status of “Deadline applies” places New Jersey alongside states whose deadline is twenty-three, which is why the rule text carries the number.

Sources

P.L. 2019, c. 120 (S477 SCS) — New Jersey Legislature, official text of the whole Act 

N.J.S.A. 2A:14-2a — free full text

Civil revival window

Status Window closed
Citation N.J.S.A. 2A:14-2b (P.L. 2019, c. 120, § 9), eff. Dec. 1, 2019
Window Opened 1 December 2019; ran for two years and is closed. Filings had to be made within the two years immediately following 1 December 2019, so the last day was 30 November 2021.
The rule

The window — § 2A:14-2b(a): “Notwithstanding the statute of limitations provisions of N.J.S.2A:14-2, section 2 of P.L.2019, c. 120 (C.2A:14-2a), section 1 of P.L.1964, c. 214 (C.2A:14-2.1), or any other statute, an action at law for an injury resulting from the commission of sexual assault, any other crime of a sexual nature, a prohibited sexual act as defined in section 2 of P.L.1992, c. 7 (C.2A:30B-2), or sexual abuse as defined in section 1 of P.L.1992, c. 109 (C.2A:61B-1), that occurred prior to the effective date of P.L.2019, c. 120 (C.2A:14-2a et al.), and which action would otherwise be barred through application of the statute of limitations, may be commenced within two years immediately following the effective date.” 

The effective date — P.L. 2019, c. 120, § 10 (C.2A:14-2c): “The provisions of this amendatory and supplementary act, P.L.2019, c.120 (C.2A:14-2a et al.), shall take effect on December 1, 2019. These provisions shall be inapplicable to any civil action governed solely by the statute of limitations of another jurisdiction.” Two years from 1 December 2019 gives a last day of 30 November 2021. 

It applied to adults as well as children. Unlike most windows in this dataset, § 2A:14-2b(a) is not limited to childhood abuse — it revives claims for sexual assault and crimes of a sexual nature whenever the survivor was abused, and § 2A:14-2b(c)(1) expressly covers claims “against either a minor under the age of 18 or a person 18 years of age or older.” 

The retroactive liability rules travelled with it — § 2A:14-2b(b) applies the amended Charitable Immunity Act (C.2A:53A-7(c)) and the amended negligent hiring exception (C.2A:53A-7.4 et seq.) to actions brought in the window, so a claim filed in the window could rely on standards of institutional liability that did not exist when the abuse occurred. 

Individual actions only — § 2A:14-2b(c)(1) and (2) carry the same anti-class-action and anti-class-settlement provisions as § 2A:14-2a.

Sources

P.L. 2019, c. 120, §§ 9–10 — New Jersey Legislature, official text 

N.J.S.A. 2A:14-2a and 2A:14-2b — free full text

Reforms, court decisions and bills to track

Recent reforms the national bill-and-case tracker (25 July 2026) holds no New Jersey row, although P.L. 2019, c. 120 is one of the largest single reforms in the dataset: it extended the civil deadline to fifty-five retroactively, opened a two-year window, stripped charitable immunity for willful and grossly negligent conduct, made the negligent-hiring exception retroactive, and removed Tort Claims Act immunity and notice requirements for sexual abuse claims.
Court decisions

no New Jersey row.

Bills to track no New Jersey row.

Gaps to close: P.L. 2019, c. 120 belongs under Recent reforms across three tracks (Civil, Revival and institutional liability). State v. Rosado belongs under Court decisions — it is the criminal-side counterpart of the vested-rights cases the tracker already carries for Kentucky, Utah, Colorado, Maine and New Hampshire, decided on ex post facto rather than due process grounds; it limited § 2C:1-6 on constitutional grounds.

Notes

K.S.D. v. Ryan — not relied on here  K.S.D. v. Ryan is a decision of the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey (Civil Action No. 21-20270). It was not retrieved from a free source and has not been read, so nothing is stated from it. A federal district court decision on the constitutionality of the § 2A:14-2a retroactive extension would be worth having, but it is persuasive only, and a New Jersey state appellate decision on the point would be better authority if one exists. This should be checked before the retroactive extension is described anywhere as constitutional.
State v. Rosado — status not re-confirmed  The Appellate Division decided Rosado on 29 March 2023 (475 N.J. Super. 266, 292 A.3d 522) and the opinion was read from free full text. Contemporary reporting indicates the New Jersey Supreme Court heard argument in a related statute-of-limitations and DNA matter in November 2023; no Supreme Court decision in Rosado was located, and none is asserted. Before publication, confirm whether certification was granted and whether the Appellate Division decision still stands.

Legal information, not legal advice.