BILL ANALYSIS Ó
AB 1403
Page 1
ASSEMBLY THIRD READING
AB 1403 (Judiciary Committee)
As Introduced March 12, 2013
Majority vote
JUDICIARY 10-0 APPROPRIATIONS 17-0
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|Ayes:|Wieckowski, Wagner, |Ayes:|Gatto, Harkey, Bigelow, |
| |Alejo, Chau, Dickinson, | |Bocanegra, Bradford, Ian |
| |Garcia, Gorell, | |Calderon, Campos, |
| |Maienschein, Muratsuchi, | |Donnelly, Eggman, Gomez, |
| |Stone | |Hall, Ammiano, Linder, |
| | | |Pan, Quirk, Wagner, Weber |
| | | | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY : Seeks to improve the handling of family and juvenile
law cases in our courts. Specifically, this bill :
1)Codifies case law clarifications to the Uniform Parentage Act
(UPA), particularly making the Act's provisions gender neutral
where appropriate.
2)Ratifies the authority of the Judicial Council to convert 10
subordinate judicial officer positions (SJOs) to judgeships in
2013-14, provided the conversion of these positions will
result in judges being assigned to family or juvenile law
assignments previously presided over by a subordinate judicial
officer. Provides that this authority is in addition to the
existing authority provided to convert 16 SJOs to judges.
EXISTING LAW :
1)Establishes the California UPA. Defines a parent and child
relationship as the legal relationship existing between a
child and the child's natural or adoptive parents incident to
which the law confers or imposes rights, privileges, duties
and obligations. The term includes the mother and child
relationship and the father and child relationship.
2)Defines a man as a presumed father if, among other things: a)
He was married to the child's mother and the child was born
within 300 days of the marriage; b) he attempted to marry the
child's mother; or c) he holds the child out as his own.
AB 1403
Page 2
3)Requires that the paternity presumptions be applied gender
neutrally. (Elisa B. v. Superior Court (2005) 37 Cal.4th
108.)
4)Provides that, if two or more paternity presumptions conflict
with one another, the presumption that is founded on the
weightier considerations of policy and logic controls.
Provides that a presumption of parentage under Family Code
Section 7611 is rebutted by a judgment establishing paternity
of the child by another man.
5)Provides that paternity may be established by voluntary
declaration for unmarried parents, or through a civil action
brought by any interested party, as specified.
6)Provides that the Legislature shall prescribe the number of
judges and provide for the officers and employees of each
superior court. Provides that the Legislature may provide for
the trial courts to appoint officers such as commissioners to
perform subordinate judicial duties.
7)Authorizes the courts to appoint subordinate judicial
officers, and sets forth their duties and titles.
8)Authorizes the conversion of 16 subordinate judicial officer
positions in eligible superior courts to judgeships each
fiscal year as specified. Authorizes the Judicial Council to
convert up to an additional 10 SJOs to judgeships each year,
upon vacancy and subsequent legislative authorization, if the
conversion of these additional positions will result in a
judge being assigned to a family or juvenile law assignment
previously presided over by a subordinate judicial officer,
but requires that such authority be ratified by the
Legislature by statutory enactment.
FISCAL EFFECT : According to the Assembly Appropriations
Committee, annual cost of up to $270,000 for conversion of up to
10 SJOs to judgeships. For each conversion of an SJO position
to a judgeship, the additional annual cost, based on salary
differences between the two positions, is approximately $27,000.
The Judicial Council indicates these additional costs will be
funded through a reallocation of money in the Trial Court Trust
Fund.
AB 1403
Page 3
COMMENTS : This Assembly Judiciary Committee bill makes two
non-controversial changes to family law. First it codifies
changes to the Uniform Parentage Act that have been firmly
established by case law. While not changing the law, these
updates will help ensure that someone reading the Family Code,
particularly the vast majority of family law litigants who today
are unrepresented by counsel, will have an accurate
understanding of the law. Second, as required by statute, the
bill ratifies the Judicial Council's authority to convert 10
subordinate judicial officers (SJOs) to judgeships in the next
year, provided those judges replace SJOs in family or juvenile
law cases. This provision seeks to improve family and juvenile
law cases by increasing the likelihood that these matters are
presided over by judges and not subordinate judicial officers.
The UPA was passed in 1975 to extend the parent and child
relationship equally to every child and to every parent,
regardless of the marital status of the parents. The UPA
defines "parent and child relationship" as "the legal
relationship existing between a child and the child's natural or
adoptive parents incident to which the law confers or imposes
rights, privileges, duties, and obligations." The term includes
both mother and child, and father and child relationships.
Legal parenthood can be established in a number of different
ways. Under the Family Code, a man is conclusively presumed to
be the father of a child if he was married to, or in a
registered domestic partnership with, and cohabitating with the
child's mother, except as specified. A man who receives a child
into his home and holds the child out as his own is also
presumed a father of the child. While the statutory scheme uses
the word "father," the presumptions must be applied gender
neutrally, so they apply to mothers as well. (See, e.g., Elisa
B. v. Superior Court (2005) 37 Cal.4th 108.) In addition, a man
who signs a voluntary declaration of paternity is presumed to be
the legal father of a child.
This bill seeks to update statutory terms, in conformity with
case law and other statutory provisions. In particular, the
bill changes the following terms:
1)The term "presumed father" is changed to "presumed parent,"
since that term is gender neutral and both a mother and a
AB 1403
Page 4
father can be a presumed parent.
2)The terms "father" and "mother" are replaced, when
appropriate, with "parent." However, in some instances, it is
important to retain the gender distinction, and in those
situations, father and mother are left in the UPA.
3)The term "insemination" has been replaced with "assisted
reproduction," which is defined in Section 7606.
4)The term "paternity" is replaced, when appropriate, with the
term "parentage." However, the voluntary paternity
declaration, for example, retains use of the term paternity.
It is important to note that this bill does not change all
gender specific terms. For example, the term "alleged father"
is not changed, since the law does not recognize alleged
mothers. Moreover, this bill does not change the
well-established law of parentage. Rather it just updates the
Family Code and makes it consistent with case law. These
changes will help ensure that someone reading the Family Code
will have an accurate understanding of the law.
This bill also seeks to improve family and juvenile law cases by
ratifying the Judicial Council's authority to convert 10 SJOs to
judgeships in 2013-14, provided the conversion of these
positions will result in a judge being assigned to a family or
juvenile law assignment previously presided over by a
subordinate judicial officer. This will increase the likelihood
that these matters will be presided over by judges and not
subordinate judicial officers.
According to the Judicial Council, historically, SJO positions
were created and funded at the county level to address courts'
needs for judicial-like resources when new judgeships were
pending or not yet authorized by the Legislature. Unlike
judges, SJOs are not directly accountable to the public, but due
to the shortages of judges, are performing some of the most
complex and sensitive judicial duties. Conversion of these
positions to judgeships when they become vacant makes them more
accountable to the public and, the author contends, helps
provide better trust and confidence in the courts.
In 2007, AB 159 (Jones) Chapter 722, of Statutes of 2007 was
AB 1403
Page 5
enacted to address a severe shortage in the number of trial
court judgeships. At that time, the Judicial Council noted
potentially serious consequences flowing from this deficiency in
judicial resources, including a significant decrease in
Californians' access to the courts, compromised public safety,
an unstable business climate, and enormous backlogs in some
courts that inhibit fair, timely and equitable justice. That
bill, in addition to authorizing 50 additional judges,
authorized the conversion of 162 SJOs, upon vacancy, to
judgeships to utilize the judicial resources more efficiently
and properly limit SJOs to subordinate judicial duties.
Recognizing the particular need for judges in family and
juvenile law cases, AB 2763 (Judiciary Committee), Chapter 690,
Statutes of 2010, authorized the Judicial Council to convert up
to an additional 10 SJOs to judgeships each year, if the
conversion of these additional positions will result in a judge
being assigned to a family or juvenile law assignment previously
presided over by an SJO. However, such authorization must be
ratified by the Legislature. This was done by the Legislature
in 2011-12. (SB 405 (Corbett), Chapter 705, Statutes of 2011.)
This bill seeks to provide the Judicial Council with that same
ratification for 2013-14.
Analysis Prepared by : Leora Gershenzon / JUD. / (916)
319-2334
FN: 0000776