Commentary: Proposed bill could make me rich!

Listen to this article

I think I might be leaving the Wisconsin Law Journal to go back to private practice, depending on the passage of certain legislation pending in the Assembly. I think it could make me very wealthy.

Before joining the Law Journal, I spent nine years doing criminal defense, specializing in sexual assault cases. I tried many cases, defending everything from patently implausible claims to some of the most heinous sex crimes in Wisconsin.

It would be valuable experience should AB 453 become law.

Currently, sec. 893.57 provides that a civil claim alleging sexual assault of a child must be brought before the plaintiff turns 35 years of age. However, according to an Oct. 22 press release from the Wisconsin Coalition Against Sexual Assault, Inc., that is “arbitrary.”

The standard statute of limitations for intentional torts, such as sexual assault, is two years, under sec. 893.57. For minors, sec. 893.16 tolls the statute of limitations for torts other than sexual assault, so it does not begin to run until the plaintiff turns 18.

So under current law, an adult who is injured by a garden variety intentional tort has two years to bring a claim. If the person is a day short of 18, he or she has two years and a day to bring a claim.

And if the intentional tort is a sexual assault, a plaintiff attacked on his or her 18th birthday still has just the two years to bring a claim. But if the person is a day short of 18, he or she has 17 years to bring a claim.

I can certainly see why some people would find that “arbitrary.” Or why some would say people shouldn’t be able to wait until they are 34 to sue for things that happened when they were children. Or why some would dryly observe that all statutes of limitation are inherently arbitrary.

But the solution to the arbitrariness that has been proposed would not narrow the arbitrary distinction between two and 17-plus years. Instead, it would remove any statute of limitations at all for the person assaulted a day before his or her 18th birthday. That claim could be brought “at any time” – when the person is 40, 60, 80, or even 100-years-old.

Furthermore, it would explicitly define the persons potentially liable under the statute to include any “legal or commercial entity.” The bill also purports to revive any cause of action barred by the present statute of limitations.

And there’s the crux. I never made all that much money doing criminal defense work, because most of my clients didn’t have very much money. And the plaintiffs who will be able to sue if AB 453 becomes law probably won’t get much money out of them either. Insurance policies generally exclude intentional torts.

But “legal and commercial entities” have a lot of money. And even if they went out of business decades ago, whoever happened to be their insurance company at the time of the alleged assault still has plenty of money.

I expect they will be willing to pay me a very princely sum to defend against these stale claims, given my extensive experience. And I intend to extract a very princely sum from them for providing that service.

I know, I’m a shameless opportunist. But at least I don’t actually support passage of this bill.