BILL ANALYSIS �
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|SENATE RULES COMMITTEE | AB 161|
|Office of Senate Floor Analyses | |
|1020 N Street, Suite 524 | |
|(916) 651-1520 Fax: (916) | |
|327-4478 | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
CONSENT
Bill No: AB 161
Author: Campos (D)
Amended: 4/8/13 in Assembly
Vote: 21
SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE : 6-0, 6/4/13
AYES: Evans, Anderson, Corbett, Jackson, Leno, Monning
NO VOTE RECORDED: Walters
ASSEMBLY FLOOR : 75-0, 4/11/13 - See last page for vote
SUBJECT : Restraining orders
SOURCE : Executive Committee of the Family Law Section of the
State Bar
DIGEST : This bill authorizes a court in a domestic violence
proceeding to issue an ex parte order restraining a party from
cashing, borrowing against, canceling, transferring, disposing
of, or changing the beneficiaries of any insurance held for the
benefit of the parties or their child(ren), to whom support may
be owed.
ANALYSIS :
Existing law:
1. Establishes the Domestic Violence Prevention Act, and
authorizes a court to issue an ex parte domestic violence
protective order enjoining a party from molesting, attacking,
CONTINUED
AB 161
Page
2
striking, stalking, threatening, sexually assaulting,
battering, harassing, telephoning, destroying personal
property, and other specified behaviors.
2. Provides that a domestic violence protective order may
include, among other things, orders excluding a party from a
residence, enjoining a party from specific behavior,
determining temporary custody and visitation rights,
determining the temporary use of property, and restraining a
party from specific acts to the parties' community, separate
and quasi-community property.
3. With respect to married couples, it further authorizes the
court in a domestic violence proceeding to restrain a party
from specified acts in relation to community, quasi-community
or separate property, as specified.
4. Authorizes a court to issue protective orders ex parte and/or
after a noticed motion and a hearing.
5. Mandates in an action for dissolution of a marriage, that the
parties are restrained from certain behavior, including:
A. Transferring, encumbering, concealing or in any way
disposing of any real or personal property, whether
community, quasi-community or separate property.
B. Cashing, borrowing against, cancelling,
transferring, or disposing of, or changing the
beneficiaries of any insurance or other coverage held
for the benefit of the parties and their children for
whom support may be ordered.
This bill authorizes a court to issue an ex parte order
restraining any party from cashing, borrowing against,
canceling, transferring, disposing of, or changing the
beneficiaries of any insurance or other coverage held for the
benefit of the parties and/or their child(ren) for whom support
may be ordered.
Background
Despite numerous beneficial legislative measures, domestic
violence remains a significant problem, affecting an estimated
CONTINUED
AB 161
Page
3
one in four families. "Abuse" under the Domestic Violence
Prevention Act encompasses a number of different actions,
including: (1) physically hurting or trying to hurt someone;
(2) sexual assault; (3) making someone reasonably afraid that
they or someone else are about to be seriously hurt; (4)
harassing, stalking, or threatening someone; (5) disturbing
someone's peace; or (6) destroying someone's personal property.
In addition, physical abuse, is not limited to hitting, but may
include any unwanted touching, following a person, or keeping a
person from freely coming and going. Victims of domestic
violence may petition the court to enjoin an abuser from
specified behavior for up to five years.
In family law, parties who file for dissolution of marriage are
automatically prohibited from engaging in certain behaviors,
including removing minor children from the state, disposing of
property (e.g., community, quasi-community, and/or separate
property), or changing insurance coverage, while issues
regarding the dissolution are being determined. This ensures
that while the action is pending, the status quo is maintained
and parties are protected.
Similar to an action for dissolution, in a domestic violence
proceeding the court may issue orders relating to child custody
and visitation, and orders enjoining married parties from
specified acts related to property.
Prior Legislation
AB 1596 (Hayashi, Chapter 572, Statutes of 2010) implemented
recommendations from the Judicial Council's Protective Orders
Working Group and made various changes to protective order
statutes.
AB 99 (Cohn, Chapter 125, Statutes of 2005) extended the
duration of protective orders from three to five years.
AB 878 (Rogan, Chapter 598, Statutes of 1996) expanded the
definition of "abuse" for domestic violence purposes to include
stalking, annoying or harassing telephone calls, contact by mail
with the intent to annoy or harass, and the intentional
destruction of personal property .
AB 2224 (Kuehl, Chapter 904, Statutes of 1996) increased the
CONTINUED
AB 161
Page
4
penalties for battery against a spouse or person with whom the
defendant is cohabiting from six months to 12 months.
FISCAL EFFECT : Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: No Local:
No
SUPPORT : (Verified 6/4/13)
Executive Committee of the Family Law Section of the State Bar
(source)
Association of Certified Family Law Specialists
California Communities United Institute
California Partnership to End Domestic Violence
California Police Chiefs Association
Family Law Section of the Bar Association of San Francisco
Junior Leagues of California - State Public Affairs Council
ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT : According to the author's office, this
bill provides additional economic and financial safeguards for
domestic violence victims. It ensures that their health, auto,
and other forms of insurance will be protected when leaving an
abusive relationship. This bill specifically allows a victim to
obtain an ex parte order prohibiting their abuser from
cancelling or changing any insurance policy held for the benefit
of the victim or their children.
Currently, when a married person files for a restraining order,
the Domestic Violence Prevention Act only contains parallel
provisions to obtain ex parte orders to protect property ? but
has no similar protection for insurance. This bill is meant to
provide married persons filing for a domestic violence
restraining order with similar protections for insurance.
ASSEMBLY FLOOR : 75-0, 4/11/13
AYES: Achadjian, Alejo, Allen, Ammiano, Atkins, Bigelow, Bloom,
Blumenfield, Bocanegra, Bonilla, Bonta, Bradford, Brown,
Buchanan, Ian Calderon, Campos, Chau, Ch�vez, Chesbro, Conway,
Cooley, Dahle, Daly, Dickinson, Donnelly, Eggman, Fong, Fox,
Frazier, Beth Gaines, Garcia, Gatto, Gomez, Gordon, Gorell,
Gray, Grove, Hagman, Hall, Roger Hern�ndez, Holden, Jones,
Levine, Linder, Logue, Maienschein, Mansoor, Medina, Melendez,
Mitchell, Morrell, Mullin, Muratsuchi, Nazarian, Nestande,
CONTINUED
AB 161
Page
5
Olsen, Pan, Perea, V. Manuel P�rez, Quirk, Quirk-Silva,
Rendon, Salas, Skinner, Stone, Ting, Torres, Wagner, Waldron,
Weber, Wieckowski, Wilk, Williams, Yamada, John A. P�rez
NO VOTE RECORDED: Harkey, Jones-Sawyer, Lowenthal, Patterson,
Vacancy
AL:d 6/5/13 Senate Floor Analyses
SUPPORT/OPPOSITION: SEE ABOVE
**** END ****
CONTINUED