D.L. v. Community Based Care, 51 Fla. L. Weekly D280 (Fla. 5th DCA Feb. 13, 2026):

The plaintiff ‘s complaint alleged that she entered foster care as a minor and was placed in a foster home. She reported that another child in the home had molested her, but the foster parents took no action. Later, she alleged the foster father sexually battered her.

The plaintiff sued the entities that placed her in the home for failing to properly screen the foster parents and failing to ensure the safety of the child residents. She also sued the foster mother, alleging that their negligence allowed her placement and continued placement in a dangerous home and failed to protect her from sexual abuse.

The trial court dismissed two defendants and entered summary judgment for the other, holding the claims arose from “ordinary” negligence, and were subject to the four year limitations period in section 95.11(3)(a).

The Fifth District reversed. The court applied section 95.11(9) (as it existed when suit was filed), which provided that an action related to a sexual battery violation involving a victim under 16 may be commenced at any time, so long as it would not have been time barred on or before July 1, 2010.

The key question was whether Plaintiff claims against these defendants were “related to” the alleged sexual battery. The court held the phrase” related to” is broad, requiring only a connection, and found the connection obvious because the essence of the plaintiff’s case was that the defendants negligence allowed and facilitated the sexual abuse.

The court also rejected attempts to narrow the statute to only certain causes of action or only to the perpetrator. It emphasized the statute permits an action without limiting the type of claim and is broad enough to include claims against non-perpetrators if related to the sexual battery. The court reversed the remanded for the case to proceed.