BILL ANALYSIS Ó
AB 536
Page 1
Date of Hearing: April 22, 2015
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
Jimmy Gomez, Chair
AB
536 (Bloom) - As Amended April 8, 2015
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|Policy |Judiciary |Vote:|10 - 0 |
|Committee: | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
|-------------+-------------------------------+-----+-------------|
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
|-------------+-------------------------------+-----+-------------|
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Urgency: No State Mandated Local Program: NoReimbursable: No
SUMMARY:
This bill clarifies the requirements necessary before a court
can issue a mutual restraining order. Specifically, this bill:
AB 536
Page 2
1)Provides that a court may not issue a mutual restraining order
unless, among other things, each party presents written
evidence of abuse or domestic violence in an application for
relief using a mandatory Judicial Council restraining order
application form.
2)Provides that written evidence in a responsive pleading does
not satisfy the requirement that the written evidence of abuse
or domestic violence must be presented to a court before it
can issue a mutual restraining order.
3)Requires Judicial Council, by July 1, 2016, to modify forms as
necessary to provide notice of these requirements.
FISCAL EFFECT:
Minor and absorbable costs for the Judicial Council to modify
the necessary forms.
COMMENTS:
1)Purpose and Background. A mutual restraining order is a single
order that restrains both the petitioner and the respondent.
Existing law requires that before a court can issue such an
order, both parties must appear and present written evidence
of abuse and the court must find that neither party acted as
the primary aggressor. These requirements are designed to
ensure that a court only issues a mutual restraining order
when one is truly warranted. This bill clarifies that the
written evidence of abuse must be submitted on an application
for affirmative relief, and not simply as part of a responsive
pleading.
AB 536
Page 3
This bill is consistent with federal law, which provides,
under the Violence Against Women Act, that a protective order
is only entitled to full faith and credit if issued against a
party who has petitioned for a restraining order in a "cross
or counter petition" (i.e., not an Answer). Thus the
clarification in this bill will help ensure that California
restraining orders are entitled to full faith and credit
(allowing the order to be enforced in another state).
2)Judicial Council Forms. To assist parties seeking or defending
against a domestic violence restraining order, the vast
majority of whom -- upwards of 90 percent, according to the
Judicial Council -- are unrepresented, the Judicial Council
has a series of forms and instruction sheets for domestic
violence retraining orders. These forms are written in
relatively simple English and translated into four languages.
This bill requires that the forms be updated, as appropriate,
to ensure the parties understand that a mutual restraining
order can only be issued if both parties provide written
evidence of abuse on the application for relief form and not
the response form.
Analysis Prepared by:Jennifer Swenson / APPR. / (916)
319-2081
AB 536
Page 4