The revival provision of the Child Victims Act (CVA) has faced several confusing changes since it was enacted seven years ago. The revival section was originally intended to establish a one-time, one-year window from August 14, 2019, to August 14, 2020, for childhood sexual abuse survivors to bring otherwise time-barred actions under the CVA. In 2020, however, as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic and the difficulties it posed on plaintiffs and the court system, then–New York State Governor Andrew Cuomo issued a series of executive orders to extend the time to file actions under the CVA (the Executive Orders).1 Separately, on August 3, 2020, the NYS legislature passed a CVA amendment, which codified an extension of the revival provision until August 14, 2021.
Until the decision in Finley v. Diocese of Brooklyn,2 it was unclear whether the Executive Orders tolled the time to file CVA actions, thereby adding several months to the revival window beyond the extended August 14, 2021, deadline. In Finley, the plaintiff filed a CVA action against the Diocese of Brooklyn and Mary Queen of Heaven Catholic Academy, alleging that he was sexually abused by his choir teacher as a student. The plaintiff commenced the action on March 24, 2022, and amended the complaint on May 25, 2022. The defendants sought to dismiss the amended complaint, arguing that it was time-barred under the CVA’s revival window, which closed on August 14, 2021. The plaintiff argued that his action was timely because the Executive Orders created a 228-day toll on the closing of the revival window.
The trial court denied the defendants’ motion and found the amended complaint was not time-barred. The Appellate Division, Second Department, affirmed. The court examined the CVA amendment and found that tolling is consistent with the CVA amendment’s plain language and legislative intent. The court noted that language about tolls or Executive Orders were “conspicuously missing” because the legislature had express authority to address them and because other sections of the CVA explicitly mention them. The court also noted that tolling is consistent with the CVA amendment’s intent to “allow survivors more time to come forward.” The Second Department determined that the Executive Orders work “in tandem” with the CVA amendment to “accommodate the peculiar difficulties precluding survivors of child sex abuse to come forward in pursuit of justice.” Thus, the court held that “all [COVID-era] executive orders impose an aggregate 228-day toll on the closing of the CVA revival window, making March 30, 2022, the latest date by which to commence a CVA action.”
This case is important because it eliminates any confusion regarding the timeliness of CVA pleadings, thus ending inconsistent decision-making from trial courts, at least in the Second Department. As a result of this decision, parties can also make more informed decisions about CVA case strategy going forward.
If you have any questions regarding the content of this alert, please contact Dana Lee, associate, at dlee@barclaydamon.com; Matthew Larkin, Torts & Products Liability Defense Practice Area chair, at mlarkin@barclaydamon.com; or another member of the firm’s Torts & Products Liability Defense Practice Area.
1 See Executive Order [A. Cuomo] Nos. 202.14 [9 NYCRR 8.202.14] [Apr. 7, 2020], 202.28 [9 NYCRR 8.202.28] [May 7, 2020], 202.38 [9 NYCRR 8.202.38] [June 6, 2020], 202.48 [9 NYCRR 8.202.48] [July 6, 2020], Executive Order [A. Cuomo] No. 202.55 [9 NYCRR 8.202.55] [Aug. 5, 2020], Nos. 202.60 [9 NYCRR 8.202.60] [Sept. 4, 2020], 202.67 [9 NYCRR 8.202.67] [Oct. 4, 2020].
2 2026 NY Slip Op 01183 (2nd Dep’t, March 4, 2026).