ANNAPOLIS, April 5 — The Judicial Proceedings Committee voted to report House Bill 1378 favorably after adopting a clarifying amendment that narrows how courts treat repeated incidents in child‑abuse cases and applies new caps and attorney‑fee limits.

The bill, as explained by committee counsel, alters provisions relating to awards of non‑economic damages in actions for child sexual abuse, revises caps in the local and State Tort Claims Acts and in some provisions applicable to local boards of education, and limits awarded attorneys’ fees as specified in the bill.

Committee counsel told members the bill removes language that referred to an “incident or occurrence” and replaces it with “claim or claims.” Counsel said the intent is to treat repeated acts against a single claimant at a facility as a single claim for purposes of the statutory caps: “the intent there is to clarify the intent of the General Assembly … that that’s 1 claim. And that’s 1 for the claimant,” counsel said during the hearing.

Senator West asked that counsel place on the record an explanation of the change in light of case law, citing an appellate decision the committee discussed. West said legislative history can affect judicial interpretation and sought clarity that the substitution of “claim or claims” would alter how cases are pleaded and decided in court. Counsel and other members referenced the appellate case Maryland v. Michael Young while explaining that the replacement language focuses on the pleaded claim rather than isolated factual incidents underlying that claim.

A technical amendment was adopted to correct a printing error and to narrow the applicability of a $400,000 cap. Committee counsel explained the amendment makes that cap apply only to previously stale claims revived and filed on or after June 1, 2025, rather than to all claims filed on or after that date.

Senator West proposed a substantive amendment that would impose a 20% surcharge on recovered attorneys’ fees in child‑victim cases, directing the surcharge to a newly created Child Victims Services and Prevention Fund. West described the proposal as a means to shift part of potential fee revenue into services for victims; he read the amendment’s opening provision describing a 20% surcharge on fees collected to be submitted to the Administrative Office of the Courts.

After discussion about the fiscal and access‑to‑justice implications and whether the change could be made prospectively, counsel noted the Attorney General’s March 17 opinion addressing attorney‑fee modification and said a prospective surcharge could be enacted by future legislation. Senator West withdrew the amendment, saying he would pursue the idea in the next legislative session.

Committee member Miss Spence moved adoption of the clarifying technical amendment; the committee then voted on the bill as amended. The committee reported House Bill 1378 favorably with the amendment by a 10–1 vote.

What the bill does not do: the committee record shows no final change to existing statutes beyond the text of HB 1378 and the technical conforming amendment; the withdrawn surcharge proposal was not adopted.

Votes at the committee: House Bill 1378 (as amended) — favorable report, 10 yes, 1 no.

Looking ahead: With the bill reported favorably, it moves to the full House for floor consideration and any further amendments. The committee discussion noted possible future legislation to address attorney‑fee surcharges prospectively if lawmakers decide to pursue that approach.