BILL ANALYSIS
------------------------------------------------------------
|SENATE RULES COMMITTEE | SB 1285|
|Office of Senate Floor Analyses | |
|1020 N Street, Suite 524 | |
|(916) 651-1520 Fax: (916) | |
|327-4478 | |
------------------------------------------------------------
CONSENT
Bill No: SB 1285
Author: Steinberg (D)
Amended: 4/29/10
Vote: 21
SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE : 4-0, 5/4/10
AYES: Corbett, Harman, Hancock, Leno
NO VOTE RECORDED: Walters
SUBJECT : Human trafficking: punitive damages
SOURCE : Author
DIGEST : This bill clarifies the evidentiary standard for
awarding punitive damages to victims of human trafficking.
ANALYSIS : Existing federal law establishes the crimes of
kidnapping in interstate or foreign commerce, peonage,
slavery, and trafficking in persons, and provides for
criminal and civil penalties. (18 U.S.C. Sections 1201,
and 1581-1595)
Existing federal law, the Victims of Trafficking and
Violence Protection Act of 2000, acknowledges the crime of
human trafficking, and delineates various federal actions
to combat trafficking, punish perpetrators, and provides
services to victims of trafficking. (22 U.S.C. Section
7100, et seq.)
Existing state law makes human trafficking a crime.
CONTINUED
SB 1285
Page
2
(Section 236.1 of the Penal Code)
Existing state law, the California Trafficking Victims
Protection Act, allows a victim of human trafficking to
bring a civil action for actual damages, compensatory
damages, punitive damages, injunctive relief, or any other
appropriate relief. (Section 52.5 of the Civil Code)
Existing state law provides an award of punitive damages
upon proof of clear and convincing evidence that a
defendant has been guilty of malice, fraud, or oppression.
(Section 3294 of the Civil Code)
Existing state law provides a definition for duress as
applied to human trafficking. (Section 236.1(d)(2) of the
Penal Code)
This bill clarifies that a plaintiff will have to prove by
clear and convincing evidence that a defendant acted with
malice, oppression, fraud, or duress in committing an act
of human trafficking against the plaintiff in order to be
awarded punitive damages.
FISCAL EFFECT : Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: No
Local: No
ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT : The author writes:
"Civil Code Section 52.5's provision regarding the
possible award of punitive damages is imprecise and may
be confusing to the public. This bill would bring clarity
to the provision.
"Section 52.5 appears to set forth an additional ground
for punitive damages not set forth in Civil Code Section
3294. However, upon review, that apparent additional
ground, 'duress,' as enacted in AB 22 as part of Penal
Code Section 236.1, is already covered by the current
punitive damages law.
"'Duress,' as added by AB 22, 'includes knowingly
destroying, concealing, removing, confiscating, or
possessing any actual or purported passport or
immigration document of the victim.'
SB 1285
Page
3
"While Section 3294 does not specifically set forth
'duress' as a basis for a punitive damages award, the
definition of duress as established by AB 22 fits within
the definitions of malice, oppression, and fraud, the
current bases for a punitive damages award. Clearly,
conduct defined as duress qualifies as conduct intended
to cause injury to the plaintiff (malice); or is
despicable and subjects the victim to unjust hardship
(oppression). Further, the intentional concealment,
removal, or destruction of the victim's passport or
immigration documents is a concealment of a material fact
with the intent to deprive the victim of property or
legal rights or otherwise cause injury (fraud). ?
"This bill would harmonize the provisions of Civil Code
Section 52.5 with existing law, by clearly stating the
evidentiary standard for awarding punitive damages to
reflect existing law."
RJG:mw 5/6/10 Senate Floor Analyses
SUPPORT/OPPOSITION: NONE RECEIVED
**** END ****