The Maryland Senate voted to approve changes to House Bill 1378 on April 5, modifying damage limits for revived child sexual-abuse claims, clarifying that recoveries are per claimant rather than per "occurrence," and setting a June 1 cutoff that affects the level of recoverable damages for claims filed after that date.

Supporters said the bill balances survivorsaccess to court with the statebudgetary risks created after the General Assembly in 2023 extended the time during which decades-old abuse claims can be filed. The chair of the SenateJudicial Proceedings Committee described the measure as an attempt to "balance the equities" between ensuring a day in court for survivors and limiting fiscal exposure to the state.

The debate centered on how courts interpret "occurrence" and on multiple numeric caps described on the floor. Sponsor remarks summarized four primary changes: the bill replaces the term "incident or occurrence" with "claim or claimant," preserves earlier caps for some revived claims filed before June 1, 2025, and lowers caps for revived claims filed after that date to the amounts stated on the floor. The bill also limits attorney fees in settlements to 20% (25% if litigation proceeds to trial), and it directs school boards to adjust related insurance coverage.

Opponents and some senators urged caution. The chamber's minority whip warned that the 2023 law's removal of time bars created a large number of potential claims and argued that the state could face multi-billion-dollar exposure depending on how "occurrence" is interpreted and how many claimants or occurrences a single complainant could assert. The minority whip said publicly filed counts and attorney statements suggest thousands of potential suits and that the cumulative exposure could double the current budget gap if not contained.

Senators exchanged legal and fiscal assessments on the floor: proponents noted an earlier March court opinion that treated closely timed assaults as separate incidents in one factual context, while others said older case law is sparse and the new language is intended to clarify legislative intent. Members also discussed whether the measure would be subject to immediate legal challenge on constitutional grounds because it modifies entitlement to recoveries granted by prior legislation.

Procedural moves on the floor included adoption of a committee amendment and passage on the floor. The clerk recorded the passage of House Bill 1378 after the final roll call.

The bill passed the Senate with the recorded affirmative tally reported on the journal as 36 votes in favor. Sponsors and opponents said they expected immediate legal challenges and differed on whether the measure would ultimately reduce the state's overall liability from claims filed under the 2023 change.

The House-originated bill will return to the House or be the subject of any further conference as allowed by the legislative process. The Senate recorded the committee-level changes and the floor action in the legislative record.