§ 340.9.Insurance Claim For Damages Arising Out of Northridge Earthquake of 1994
Title 2. Of the Time of Commencing Civil Actions · Chapter 3. The Time of Commencing Actions Other Than for the Recovery of Real Property · Enacted 1899 · no amendments on record · Last verified July 28, 2026
Full Text of § 340.9
Plain-English Summary
The January 1994 Northridge earthquake damaged tens of thousands of homes across the San Fernando Valley, and much of that damage did not show up right away. Cracked foundations, shifted framing, and hidden structural harm sometimes surfaced only after a policyholder’s ordinary window for suing an insurer had already closed. Section 340.9 addresses that gap with a narrow, one-time fix rather than a lasting change to how insurance disputes are timed.
The section revives claims that were otherwise barred solely because the statute of limitations had run, but only for insurance claims tied to Northridge earthquake damage, and only if the policyholder had already reached out to the insurer or the insurer’s representative about potential earthquake damage before January 1, 2000. That contact requirement keeps the revival window from becoming an opening for brand-new claims invented after the fact; it is meant for people who raised the issue with their carrier at the time but never got to court before the deadline passed. Once revived, a claim had to be filed within one year of the section’s effective date.
The revival does not reach every old claim. It excludes any claim already litigated to finality in court, and it excludes any claim resolved through a signed written settlement where the insured was represented by California counsel who signed off on the agreement. Subdivision (c) also makes clear the section leaves untouched any claim that was not yet time-barred when the section took effect; it rescues expired claims rather than lengthening deadlines that hadn’t run out.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is Section 340.9 and why does it single out the Northridge earthquake?
It is a one-time revival statute passed after the 1994 Northridge earthquake, letting policyholders bring an insurance claim for earthquake damage that would otherwise be time-barred, so long as they had already flagged the damage to their insurer before 2000.
Can I still use Section 340.9 today to revive an old Northridge earthquake insurance claim?
No. The revival window ran for only one year after the section took effect in 2001, so that filing period closed long ago; it applied to a specific historical group of claims rather than an ongoing option.
Does Section 340.9 revive a claim I already settled with my insurer?
No. It excludes any claim resolved through a signed written settlement where the insured had a lawyer admitted to practice in California who signed the agreement.
Did Section 340.9 shorten or lengthen deadlines for earthquake claims that hadn’t expired yet?
No. Subdivision (c) makes clear the section only revives claims that were already time-barred; it does not change the limitations period for a claim that was still timely when the section took effect.
Amendment History
Added by Stats 2000 ch 1090 (SB 1899), s 1, eff. 1/1/2001.