NH Supreme Court Says 2020 Repeal of Civil Statute of Limitations for Sexual Assault Can’t Be Applied Retroactively
By Granite State Report
CONCORD — Oct. 15, 2025. New Hampshire’s highest court ruled that the state’s 2020 elimination of the civil statute of limitations for sexual assault (RSA 508:4-g) cannot be used to revive claims that were already time-barred before the law took effect on September 18, 2020. The decision, in Randy Ball v. Roman Catholic Bishop of Manchester (No. 2024-0606), leaves in place a lower-court dismissal of a lawsuit alleging 1970s abuse at a Catholic summer camp. The justices said retroactive application would violate the state constitution’s ban on retrospective laws and the vested right to a limitations defense. (AP News)
What the court actually decided
The court held that, although RSA 508:4-g now says survivors “may commence a personal action at any time,” that 2020 change cannot revive claims whose deadlines had already expired under earlier law. The opinion rests on Part I, Article 23 of the N.H. Constitution, which disfavors retroactive laws that impair vested rights—here, a defendant’s statute-of-limitations defense. (New Hampshire Gaming Control Board)
The case behind the ruling
Plaintiff Randy Ball sued the Diocese in 2023, alleging he was raped by a priest at Camp Fatima in the mid-1970s. Under the law then in force, he had until age 20 (1986) to file; the 2020 amendment removed deadlines for civil sexual-assault claims, but the Supreme Court said that change can’t reach back to revive claims already expired decades ago. Briefs and docket materials for Ball are posted by the Judicial Branch. (InDepthNH.org)
Why this matters now
Practically, survivors whose civil claims expired before Sept. 18, 2020, likely remain barred from suing based solely on the 2020 law. Survivors with claims that had not yet expired as of that date may still benefit from RSA 508:4-g’s removal of deadlines going forward. The Diocese welcomed the ruling as necessary to defend against very old claims, while the court emphasized it was interpreting the constitution, not minimizing the harms of abuse. (AP News)
How New Hampshire compares
Maine’s Supreme Judicial Court reached a similar result in January, striking down that state’s retroactive removal of time limits for civil child-sex-abuse claims (Dupuis v. Roman Catholic Bishop of Portland, 2025 ME 6). The regional trend suggests that “look-back” windows or retroactive revivals face steep constitutional headwinds in some New England courts. (Maine Courts)
Primary sources & further reading
- AP recap of the ruling (Oct. 15, 2025): New Hampshire’s 2020 law can’t be applied retroactively. (AP News)
- Statute text (RSA 508:4-g): Current law stating survivors “may commence a personal action at any time.” (New Hampshire Gaming Control Board)
- Case page & filings: Randy Ball v. Roman Catholic Bishop of Manchester docket and briefs. (New Hampshire Judicial Branch)
- Context features on the Camp Fatima litigation: Reporting leading up to oral arguments. (InDepthNH.org)
- Comparative development in Maine: Official opinion PDF and coverage. (Maine Courts)
Related video reporting (YouTube)
- WMUR segment: “Statute of limitations argued in sexual abuse lawsuit against Diocese of Manchester” — background on the Camp Fatima case (2024). https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v09s1MV5eiU (YouTube)
If you need help
New Hampshire’s 24/7 confidential hotline connects survivors to local crisis centers for free support, advocacy, and services: 1-866-644-3574. More resources are available via the N.H. Coalition Against Domestic and Sexual Violence. (nhcadsv.org)
What to watch next: Whether the parties seek rehearing; how lower courts apply this ruling to similar cases; and whether lawmakers explore alternative avenues that could pass constitutional muster without reviving expired claims, as litigators and advocates recalibrate in its wake.
