BILL ANALYSIS Ó
SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE
Senator Hannah-Beth Jackson, Chair
2015-2016 Regular Session
AB 1519 (Committee on Judiciary)
Version: June 15, 2015
Hearing Date: July 14, 2015
Fiscal: Yes
Urgency: No
NR
SUBJECT
Judiciary omnibus: family support
DESCRIPTION
This bill, sponsored by the Assembly Committee on Judiciary,
would make various changes to the Family Code, including:
providing that the Department of Child Support Services (DCSS)
has no obligation to determine whether an account at the
financial institution of the recipient's choice is a
qualifying account, as defined;
effective July 1, 2016, allowing a local child support agency
to electronically file pleadings, as specified;
clarifying that a petitioner is required to serve the
preliminary declaration of disclosure either concurrently with
the petition for legal separation or within 60 days of filing
the petition or response; and
ratifying the authority of the Judicial Council to convert 10
subordinate judicial officer positions to judgeships in the
2015-16 fiscal year, as specified.
BACKGROUND
AB 1519, sponsored by the Assembly Committee on Judiciary,
seeking to improve the handling of family law cases in the
courts, would make four clarifying and/or technical changes to
family law.
CHANGES TO EXISTING LAW
1.Existing law provides that parties to a dissolution or legal
AB 1519 (Committee on Judiciary)
Page 2 of ?
separation must serve on the other party a preliminary
declaration of disclosure of all assets and liabilities in
which one or both parties may have an interest. (Fam. Code
Sec. 2103.)
Existing law provides that the preliminary declaration of
disclosure of assets must be served within 60 days or
concurrently with service of the petition for dissolution of
marriage of the parties, and must be signed under penalty of
perjury. (Fam. Code Sec. 2104.)
This bill would clarify that the preliminary declaration of
disclosure of assets must be served within 60 days or
concurrently with service of the petition for legal
separation.
2.Existing federal law , the Electronic Funds Transfer Act
(EFTA), provides a basic framework establishing the rights,
liabilities, and responsibilities of participants in
electronic fund and remittance transfer systems. (15 U.S.C.
Sec. 1693 et seq.)
Existing law requires that if child support payments are
deposited directly into an account of the recipient's choice,
the funds only be deposited into a "qualifying account"
defined as a demand deposit or savings account at an insured
financial institution in the name of the person entitled to
the receipt of child support payments, or a prepaid card
account that meets specific criteria.
This bill would provide that the Department of Child Support
Services (DCSS) has no obligation to determine whether an
account meets the specified criteria of a qualifying account.
3.Existing law provides that the Legislature shall prescribe the
number of judges and provide for the officers and employees of
each superior court. Existing law also states that the
Legislature may provide for the trial courts to appoint
officers such as commissioners to perform subordinate judicial
duties. (Cal. Const., art. VI, Secs. 4, 22.)
Existing law authorizes the courts to appoint subordinate
judicial officers, and sets forth their duties and titles.
(Gov. Code Sec. 71622.)
AB 1519 (Committee on Judiciary)
Page 3 of ?
Existing law authorizes the conversion of 16 subordinate
judicial officer positions in eligible superior courts to
judgeships each fiscal year as specified. Existing law
further 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 an SJO, but requires that such authority be
ratified by the Legislature by statutory enactment. (Gov.
Code Secs. 69615-16.)
This bill would ratify the authority of the Judicial Council
to convert 10 subordinate judicial officer positions (SJOs) to
judgeships in 2014-2015, 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, and would provide that this
authority is in addition to the existing authority provided to
convert 16 SJOs to judges.
COMMENT
1.Stated need for the bill
According to the author:
This Committee bill makes non-controversial changes to family
law. First, it clarifies that, in a legal separation
proceeding, preliminary disclosure declarations must be served
on the other party within the timeframe required in
dissolution proceedings. Second, it clarifies the duty of the
Department of Child Support Services with respect to prepaid
card accounts, consistent with the duty of the EDD issuing
unemployment compensation benefits and county treasurers
issuing public benefit payments. Finally, as required by
statute, the bill ratifies the Judicial Council's authority to
convert 10 SJOs to judgeships in the next year, provided those
judges replace SJOs in family or juvenile law cases. This
last provision seeks to improve family and juvenile law cases
by increasing the likelihood that these matters are presided
over by more directly accountable judges.
2.Preliminary declaration of disclosure of assets in an action
for legal separation
AB 1519 (Committee on Judiciary)
Page 4 of ?
The Elkins Family Law Task Force, chaired by Associate Justice
Laurie D. Zelon of the Court of Appeal, Second Appellate
District, Division Seven, was appointed in May 2008 for the
purpose of conducting a comprehensive review of family law
proceedings in order to make recommendations to the Judicial
Council that would increase access to justice for family law
litigants; ensure fairness and due process; and provide for more
effective and consistent family law rules, policies, and
procedures. The task force was formed at the suggestion of the
California Supreme Court in Elkins v. Superior Court (2007) 41
Cal.4th 1369. The task force conducted a comprehensive review
of family courts through in-person meetings, conference calls,
and outreach to family court stakeholders and litigants. The
final report contains twenty-one main recommendations; the
Judicial Council accepted the report on April 23, 2010.
(Hereinafter, Elkins Report.) The final report can be found at
(Elkins Family Law Task Force: Final Report and
Recommendations, (April 2010) Judicial Council
[as
of June 29, 2015].)
While many of the Task Force's recommendations may be
implemented by the courts, whether through Rule of Court or even
informal policy change, others require statutory changes. In
2010, AB 939 (Committee on Judiciary, Chapter 352, Statutes of
2010) was enacted to implement most of the Elkins Task Force's
key legislative recommendations. In 2012, following another
recommendation of the Task Force, the Legislature required that
the preliminary disclosure declaration be served within 60 days
of the filing of the petition and/or response in dissolution
cases. (AB 1406, Judiciary, Chapter 107, Statutes of 2012.)
This bill would apply the same time frame in legal separation
cases, which was arguably the intent of the initial legislation,
and appropriate as it will ensure that spouses are required to
timely provide each other with relevant information in the event
of a legal separation.
3.Direct deposit of child support into qualifying accounts
Existing law provides that a child's parents share equal
responsibility to support the child in a manner suitable to the
child's circumstances. (Fam. Code Sec. 3900.) Child support is
generally awarded when parents do not live together with the
child, and the amount is based on a number of factors, including
AB 1519 (Committee on Judiciary)
Page 5 of ?
the time a child spends with each parent and each parent's
earnings. Child support can either be determined by agreement
of the parents or by court order. In California, the child
support program is administered by the Department of Child
Support Services (DCSS), and carried out at the county level.
Recipients of child support may receive payments by check,
direct deposit, or by the state's Electronic Pay Card.
In 2013, the Legislature authorized members of the California
Work Opportunity and Responsibility to Kids (CalWORKS) program
to receive monthly payments by electronic funds transfer only
into qualifying accounts. That bill responded to fees and other
penalties recipients had been charged for using various
electronic cards connected to their benefits by extending
important federal consumer protections such as deposit
insurance, safeguards from theft and unauthorized charges, and
prohibitions against overdraft fees and other credit-related
features. AB 2252 (Pérez, Chapter 180, Stats. 2014) was enacted
last year to apply those same protections to persons who choose
to receive child support through electronic fund transfers into
qualifying accounts.
This bill would further provide that DCSS has no obligation to
ensure that the account a recipient has chosen to have funds
directly deposited into is a qualifying account. Staff notes
that nothing in existing law requires DCSS to ensure that
accounts are qualifying, and additionally protects DCSS from
liability for authorizing the direct deposit of child support
payments into a non-qualifying account. Thus, existing law
arguably creates minimal responsibility for DCSS to assist
custodial parents in navigating the complicated child support
system and protect whatever amount of support they receive. The
author argues that this is consistent with existing law for
similar prepaid card accounts.
4.Conversions of available subordinate judicial officer
positions to judgeships in family and juvenile court
Under current law, the Legislature is responsible for
prescribing the number of judges and providing for the officers
and employees of each superior court. (Cal. Const., art. VI,
Sec. 4.) Existing law further permits the Legislature to
provide for, and the courts to appoint, subordinate judicial
officers (SJOs) to assist the courts in carrying out their
duties. (Id. at Sec. 22; Gov. Code Sec. 71622.)
AB 1519 (Committee on Judiciary)
Page 6 of ?
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. However, responding to the shortage of
judges available to handle the trial courts' workload, the
Legislature has considered numerous bills over the last several
years that established new judgeships and authorized the
conversion of up to 162 existing SJOs (16 per fiscal year) to
judgeships upon vacancy. Unlike judges, SJOs are not directly
accountable to the public, but due to the shortages of judges,
they are performing some of the most complex and sensitive
judicial duties.
Recognizing the particular need for judges in family and
juvenile law cases, AB 2763 (Committee on Judiciary, 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 2011-2012 through SB 405 (Corbett, Chapter 705,
Statutes of 2011), in 2013 through AB 1403 (Committee on
Judiciary, Chapter 510, Statutes of 2013), and last year through
AB 2745 (Committee on Judiciary, Chapter 311, Statutes of 2014).
This bill would provide the Judicial Council with that same
ratification for 2014-2015.
5. Electronic filing of pleadings by local child support
agencies
In 2010, SB 1274 (Committee on Judiciary, Chapter 156, Statutes
2010) authorized parties to consent to or the court to order
electronic service of documents that are not required to be
personally served. Among other things, SB 1274 also required
the Judicial Council to adopt uniform rules relating to the
integrity of electronic filing and service of documents in the
trial courts of the state, and redefined "electronic service" to
include both electronic notification and electronic
transmission, as specified. Since the passage of SB 1274, some
counties have allowed electronic filing, but it is not entirely
clear how widespread the practice is.
Consistent with SB 1274, this bill would expressly allow local
AB 1519 (Committee on Judiciary)
Page 7 of ?
child support agencies to file pleadings electronically, and
would require that an original, pleading, signed under penalty
of perjury, be executed on the same day, or before, the
electronic pleading. This bill would additionally allow the
local child support agency to maintain the original signed
pleading by way of an electronic copy in the Statewide Automated
Child Support System.
Support : Executive Committee of the Family Law Section of the
State Bar; Judicial Council of California
Opposition : None Known
HISTORY
Source : Committee on Judiciary
Related Pending Legislation : None Known
Prior Legislation :
SB 340 (Anderson, Chapter 46, Statutes of 2015) would provide
that a preliminary declaration of disclosure is not required by
a petitioner if the petitioner served the summons and petition
by publication or posting pursuant to court order and the
respondent has defaulted, as specified.
AB 2252 (Perez, Chapter 180, Statutes of 2014) See Comment 3.
AB 2745 (Committee on Judiciary, Chapter 311, Statutes of 2014)
See Comment 4.
AB 1403 (Committee on Judiciary, Chapter 510, Statutes of 2013)
See Comment 4.
AB 1406 (Committee on Judiciary, Chapter 107, Statutes of 2012)
set a 60 day time limit for the preliminary declaration of
disclosure, as specified, and required the preliminary
declaration of disclosure of assets to include all tax returns
filed by the declarant within the two years prior to the date
that the party served the declaration.
SB 405 (Corbett, Chapter 705, Statutes of 2011) See Comment 4.
AB 1519 (Committee on Judiciary)
Page 8 of ?
SB 1274 (Committee on Judiciary, Ch. 156, Stats. 2010) See
Comment 5.
AB 939 (Committee on Judiciary, Chapter 352, Statutes of 2010)
made various changes to family law proceedings thereby
implementing a number of the legislative recommendations issued
by the Elkins Family Law Task Force.
AB 2763 (Committee on Judiciary, Chapter 690, Statutes of 2010)
See Comment 4.
Prior Vote :
Assembly Floor (Ayes 80, Noes 0)
Assembly Appropriations Committee (Ayes 17, Noes 0)
Assembly Judiciary Committee (Ayes 10, Noes 0)
**************