BILL ANALYSIS
AB 2126
Page 1
Date of Hearing: April 4, 2006
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON JUDICIARY
Dave Jones, Chair
AB 2126 (Lieu) - As Introduced: February 21, 2006
PROPOSED CONSENT
SUBJECT : FAMILY LAW: ENFORCEMENT OF JUDGMENTS
KEY ISSUE : TO ENSURE CONSISTENCY, SHOULD FAMILY CODE JUDGMENTS,
FOR PAYMENT OF MONEY OR POSSESSION OR SALE OF PROPERTY, BE MADE
ENFORCEABLE UNTIL PAID IN FULL?
SYNOPSIS
This non-controversial bill makes any judgment under the Family
Code for payment of money or possession or sale of property
enforceable until paid in full, and allows the judgments to be
renewed to update the amount owed. This bill also requires that
the Judicial Council prepare instructional materials relating to
enforcement of Family Code judgments and provide them to the
parties to such a judgment, in order to assist the large number
of self-represented parties. The California Law Revision
Commission is supportive of this bill in order to ensure
consistency and fairness. There is no reported opposition.
SUMMARY : Stipulates that family law monetary and property
judgments are enforceable until satisfied with no requirement
for renewal. Specifically, this bill :
1)Stipulates that a money judgment or judgment for possession or
sale of property that is made or entered under the Family
Code, including a judgment for child, family, or spousal
support, is enforceable until paid in full or otherwise
satisfied.
2)Exempts a money judgment or judgment for possession or sale of
property that is made or entered under the Family Code from
any requirement that a judgment be renewed and that a failure
to renew a judgment has no effect on the enforceability of the
judgment.
3)Stipulates that nothing in this section supersedes the law
governing enforcement of a judgment after the death of the
AB 2126
Page 2
judgment creditor or judgment debtor.
4)Requires the Judicial Council on or before January 1, 2008, to
publish self-help materials. The materials must:
a) Include a description of the remedies available for
enforcement of judgments under the Family Code and
practical advice on how to avoid disputes relating to the
enforcement of a support obligation; and,
b) Be made available to the parties in a proceeding under
The Family Code.
5)Defines "judgment" to include an order.
EXISTING LAW :
1)Stipulates that a judgment for support be enforceable until
paid in full and allows it to be renewed to update the amount
owed on the judgment. (Family Code section 4502.)
2)Stipulates that a judgment for possession or sale of property
is subject to a 10-year enforcement period. (Family Code
section 291.)
3)Provides no enforcement period or renewal procedure for a
judgment for payment of money other than support. (Code of
Civil Procedure section 683.310.)
FISCAL EFFECT : As currently in print this bill is keyed
fiscal.
COMMENTS : This bill seeks to streamline the Family Code, with
respect to judgments involving either money or property by
making them enforceable until the judgments are paid in full.
According to the author's office, this bill was proposed by the
California Law Revision Commission (CLRC) in order to help to
avoid the unfairness that can result from significantly
different enforcement rights applying to similar judgments. For
example, suppose that a marital property division order awards
the house to the husband, but requires that he pay half its
value to the wife. The parties probably do not expect that
their rights under that order are subject to significantly
different enforcement periods. However, under current law, the
judgment regarding the husband's property would be enforceable
AB 2126
Page 3
for 10 years while the judgment regarding the monetary payment
to the wife would be enforceable until it was paid in full. The
bill would also make a minor technical change to the relief that
may be granted in a limited civil case, to facilitate Family
Code judgment enforcement.
CLRC, after studying this issue, concluded that a single rule
for all Family Code judgments would be significantly less
confusing than the three different enforcement periods that
exist in current law for support, property and non-support
monetary awards. This is especially important in family law
cases, where most litigants are self-represented. The proposed
rule also reflects the fact that a Family Code judgment is not
like a typical arms-length civil judgment. There are often good
reasons for delay in enforcing a Family Code judgment. For
example, the judgment creditor may fear that enforcement would
provoke retaliation or interfere with the debtor's ability to
pay an ongoing support obligation (CLRC Final Recommendation,
"Enforcement of Judgments Under the Family Code," November
2005).
This bill would also require that the Judicial Council prepare
self-help instructional materials relating to the enforcement of
Family Code judgments and make them available to the parties to
such judgments. According to CLRC, 67% of marital dissolution
cases involve unrepresented parties. Consequently, such
material is crucial to assisting these unrepresented parties
navigate the legal system.
REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION :
Support
State Bar of California, Family Law Section
Opposition
None on file.
Analysis Prepared by : Manuel Valencia / JUD. / (916) 319-2334