BILL ANALYSIS �
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.
**************