BILL ANALYSIS Ó
AB 2683
Page 1
Date of Hearing: May 1, 2012
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON JUDICIARY
Mike Feuer, Chair
AB 2683 (Committee on Judiciary) - As Amended: April 23, 2012
PROPOSED CONSENT
SUBJECT : CIVIL LAW: OMNIBUS
KEY ISSUE : SHOULD VARIOUS NON-CONTROVERSIAL TECHNICAL AND
CLARIFYING CHANGES BE MADE TO THE PROBATE CODE?
FISCAL EFFECT : As currently in print this bill is keyed
non-fiscal.
SYNOPSIS
This non-controversial committee bill is the Assembly Judiciary
Committee's omnibus civil law bill. In order to be included in
the bill, each provision must be non-controversial and not so
substantive as to be more appropriate for a stand-alone bill.
Furthermore, if a non-controversial provision later becomes
controversial, that provision will be removed from the bill.
This year's omnibus bill merely enacts technical changes to a
few sections of the Probate Code. First, the bill makes
technical changes to two statutorily specified notices to
creditors in decedent's estates. In addition, the bill corrects
a drafting error from last year's AB 458 that resulted in an
erroneous cross-reference in the law governing venue in probate
guardianship cases. The bill is supported by the Judicial
Council and has no known opposition.
SUMMARY : Makes non-controversial and clarifying changes to
sections of the Probate Code. Specifically, this bill :
1)Corrects an erroneous cross-reference enacted by AB 458
(Atkins) of 2011, concerning venue rules for certain
guardianship cases, by replacing "Section 3140" with the
correct reference "Section 3410."
2)Amends two statutorily specified Judicial Council forms to
conform those forms' statements concerning time limits on
filing creditors' claims in decedents' estates to the actual
requirements for filing these claims established in Section
AB 2683
Page 2
9100 of the Probate Code.
EXISTING LAW :
1)Provides that subdivisions (b) to (e), inclusive, of Section
3140 of the Family Code shall apply to communications between
courts, as specified. (Probate Code Section 2204.)
2)Specifies two notices advising creditors of decedents' estates
of certain time limits for filing a claim with the court and
the personal representative of the estate. (Probate Code
Sections 8100 and 9052.)
COMMENTS : This non-controversial committee bill is the Assembly
Judiciary Committee's omnibus civil law bill. In order to be
included in the bill, each provision must be non-controversial
and not so substantive as to be more appropriate for a
stand-alone bill. Furthermore, if a non-controversial provision
later becomes controversial, that provision will be removed from
the bill.
Harmonizing notice to creditors in decedents' estates with
statutory requirements . The Judicial Council has adopted two
forms that contain advice to creditors of a decedent about their
responsibility to file claims with the court and with the
personal representative of the debtor's probate estate. First,
the Notice of Petition to Administer Estate (form DE-121) must
be used by a petitioner for the appointment of a personal
representative of a decedent's estate to give notice to persons
interested in the estate that a petition to administer the
estate has been filed and the date, time, and place of the court
hearing on the petition. Pursuant to Probate Code Section 8110,
this notice must be mailed before the hearing to the decedent's
heirs known or ascertainable by the petitioner and to each
devisee, executor, and alternate executor named in any will of
the decedent offered for probate. Although this notice is not
mailed to the decedent's creditors who are not also heirs or
beneficiaries, it is addressed in part to those creditors. Some
of the decedent's creditors will become aware of the contents of
this notice because the notice must also be published in advance
of the hearing in a newspaper of general circulation where the
decedent was domiciled or, in certain cases, where he or she
held property.
AB 2683
Page 3
The contents of form DE-121 are prescribed in detail by Probate
Code Section 8100. According to the Judicial Council, a
particular sentence specified by Section 8100 and form DE-121
could be incorrect if a special administrator with general
powers (under Probate Code section 8545) has been appointed in
the estate because a special administrator with general powers
is defined as a general personal representative in Probate Code
section 58(b). In that case, four months from the appointment
of such a special administrator could pass before the hearing
date on the petition for appointment of a personal
representative, which may potentially mislead and confuse
creditors of the estate.
Unfortunately, Form DE-121 cannot simply be revised by the
Judicial Council. Because its relevant statements to creditors
are mandated by Section 8100, that section must be amended
before the form can be revised. To resolve this problem, this
bill would clarify appropriate application of the time limits in
the notice specified by Section 8100, and a related notice
specified by Section 9052.
Correcting an erroneous cross-reference. AB 458 (Atkins), Ch.
102, Stats. 2011, added Probate Code Section 2204, which sets
out new venue rules for guardianship cases where a prior custody
action involving the proposed ward has already been filed in a
county other than the county where the guardianship petition was
filed. Unfortunately, AB 458 contained an incorrect
cross-reference that this bill now seeks to fix. Subdivision
(b) of Section 2204 governs inter-court communications in these
cases, and paragraph (4) currently states that the provisions of
subdivisions (b) to (e) of "Section 3140" shall apply to
communications between courts. This bill replaces "Section
3140" with the correct cross-reference "Section 3410", which as
part of the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement
Act is the model for these communications.
REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION :
Support
Judicial Council of California
Opposition
AB 2683
Page 4
None on file
Analysis Prepared by : Anthony Lew / JUD. / (916) 319-2334