California’s AB 250, signed by Governor Newsom on October 13, 2025, opened a two-year revival window on January 1, 2026 that allows adult sexual assault survivors to file previously time-barred civil claims against private employers. The window closes December 31, 2027. Unlike recent lookback statutes in New York and Rhode Island, AB 250 applies exclusively to private-sector entities, and its broad definition of “cover-up” turns routine confidentiality clauses into retroactive liability.
Who it affects
Self-insured California employers carrying general liability or employment practices liability (EPL) retentions, particularly those with historical sexual misconduct claims settled under nondisclosure agreements. Private corporations, private universities, medical groups, and religious organizations all fall within scope. Public entities are excluded.
The industries with the highest exposure are those that employed large workforces in California during periods when NDA-based settlements were standard practice: hospitality, entertainment, healthcare, technology, and higher education.
How the statute works
AB 250 is the fourth amendment to California Code of Civil Procedure Section 340.16 in seven years. The statute defines “cover-up” as any concerted effort to hide evidence of sexual assault, and explicitly identifies the use of nondisclosure agreements and confidentiality agreements as cover-up conduct. The agreements need not have been unlawful when executed.
Section 340.16(e)(6) extends the revival to “related claims,” including wrongful termination and sexual harassment allegations arising from the same facts. Each filing can therefore generate multiple cause-of-action exposures well beyond the underlying assault claim.
Plaintiffs need not have filed police reports or internal complaints at the time of the incident. Survivors who were 18 or older when the assault occurred are eligible.
Where it shows up in your reserves
These claims bypass normal development patterns entirely. The incidents may be years or decades old, so they will not appear in standard reporting-lag projections. Self-insured employers should treat AB 250 exposure as a pure IBNR problem: claims that exist but have never entered the system.
The reserve mechanism is a step-function increase in reported claim frequency on GL and EPL lines. Standard chain ladder or Bornhuetter-Ferguson development factors will not capture it because the claims originate outside any historical development period. Employers with known NDA-settled claims should model the exposure as a bulk IBNR load, sized by the number and severity profile of historical settlements that contained broad confidentiality language.
The prior revival window under CCP Section 340.16 (which closed December 31, 2023) generated substantial litigation volume. Early filings under the current window are accumulating in California superior courts, and a similar trajectory is expected.
What this means for your next review
At your next reserve study or interim monitoring meeting, ask your actuary to audit historical California GL and EPL claims involving sexual misconduct that were settled with NDAs or confidentiality agreements. Quantify how many fall within the AB 250 cover-up definition. If the count is non-trivial, book a supplemental IBNR load outside the standard development projection. Also confirm that your TPA’s data extract can flag revived claims separately so they do not distort your going-forward development patterns once they begin reporting.
Sources
- AB 250 bill text, California Legislature
- Proskauer Rose LLP analysis of AB 250 and CCP Section 340.16
- MCO Law: California Sexual Assault Revival Lawsuits Under AB 250, 2026 Guide
- California Code of Civil Procedure Section 340.16