BILL ANALYSIS Ó SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE Senator Noreen Evans, Chair 2013-2014 Regular Session SB 826 (Committee on Judiciary) As Amended April 29, 2013 Hearing Date: May 7, 2013 Fiscal: No Urgency: No NR SUBJECT Civil Law: Omnibus Bill DESCRIPTION This bill would correct an error in the Probate Code by replacing a reference to a "dependent" with "decedent." This bill would also update an incorrect reference to a particular section of the Standards of Judicial Administration in the Family Code. BACKGROUND SB 826 is the Senate Committee on Judiciary's omnibus bill. To be considered for inclusion, each provision must be non-controversial and not be so substantive as to be more appropriate for a stand-alone bill. If a non-controversial provision later becomes controversial, that provision will be removed from the bill. CHANGES TO EXISTING LAW 1.Existing law provides that all supervised visitation requirements of the Uniform Standards of Practice for Providers of Supervised Visitation set forth in Section 26.2 of the Standards of Judicial Administration. (Fam. Code Sec. 3202.) This bill would provide a technical correction to provide that supervised visitation requirements are set forth in Standard 5.20 of the Standards of Judicial Administration. (more) SB 826 (Senate Committee on Judiciary) Page 2 of ? 2.Existing law provides that, within 30 days after knowledge of the death of the testator, the person having custody of the testator's will must deliver the will to the clerk of the superior court of the county in which the decedent's estate may be administered and mail a copy of the will to the person named in the will as executor. (Prob. Code Sec. 8200(a).) Existing law requires the person filing the will with the clerk of the superior court to pay a filing fee, and, if an estate is commenced for the dependent named in the will, the filing fee shall be reimbursable from the estate as an expense of administration. (Prob. Code Sec. 8200(d).) This bill would provide a technical correction to provide for fee reimbursement when an estate is commenced on behalf of a "decedent," not a "dependent." COMMENT 1. Technical correction regarding the Standards of Judicial Administration Under existing law, the Judicial Council recommends Standards of Judicial Administration, and periodically updates these standards. Family Code Section 3202, subdivision (a) currently reads as follows: "All supervised visitation and exchange programs funded pursuant to this chapter shall comply with all requirements of the Uniform Standards of Practice for Providers of Supervised Visitation set forth in Section 26.2 of the Standards of Judicial Administration as amended." However, Section 26.2 was renumbered as Standard 5.20 effective January 1, 2007. (See < http://www.courts. ca.gov/documents/standards_of_judicial_ administration. pdf>.) Accordingly, this bill would instead provide that Family Code Section 3202, subdivision (a), be revised to read as follows: "All supervised visitation and exchange programs funded pursuant to this chapter shall comply with all requirements of the Uniform Standards of Practice for Providers of Supervised Visitation set forth in Standard 5.20 of the Standards of Judicial Administration as amended." 2. Technical correction regarding court fees for filing decedent's will SB 826 (Senate Committee on Judiciary) Page 3 of ? Existing law requires a person having custody of a testator's will to deliver the will to the appropriate superior court clerk within 30 days of the death of the testator. (Prob. Code Sec. 8200(a).) Existing law authorizes a person filing a will on behalf of the dependent to be reimbursed from the estate. (Prob. Code Sec. 8200(d).) This bill would instead authorize a person filing a will on behalf of the decedent to be reimbursed from the estate. By replacing "dependent" with "decedent," this bill would make a technical correction to fix an error that was contained in last year's judicial branch budget trailer bill, SB 1021 (Sen. Committee on Budget and Fiscal Review, Ch. 41, Stats. 2012). Support : None Known Opposition : None Known HISTORY Source : Judicial Council of California; an individual Related Pending Legislation : None Known Prior Legislation : See Comment 2. **************