Mother, as parent and next friend of youngest daughter, and oldest daughter brought negligence action against two cities, alleging cities’ library employees negligently failed to intervene or report inappropriate touching of daughters, when they were minors, by tutor at public libraries owned and operated by cities.
The Circuit Court granted cities’ motions to dismiss due to plaintiffs’ failure to timely serve notices of claim within six months of claims’ accrual. Mother and daughters appealed.
The Supreme Court held that statute that suspended the limitations period for individuals who were minors when their claim accrued did not apply to suspend the limitations period in notice of claim statute.
Statute that suspended the limitations period for individuals who were minors when their claim accrued did not apply to suspend the limitations period in notice of claim statute, which required all claims against a municipality for damages growing out of torts to be presented within six months from the accrual of the claim; the notice of claim statute contained no minor-specific exception to its limitations period, and statute that suspended the limitations period for minors only tolled statute of limitations and did not apply to notice of claim requirements, as notice of claim statutes imposed condition-precedent requirements, which differed from statute of limitations.