BILL ANALYSIS
AB 2700
Page 1
Date of Hearing: April 13, 2010
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON JUDICIARY
Mike Feuer, Chair
AB 2700 (Ma) - As Amended: April 5, 2010
SUBJECT : DOMESTIC PARTNERSHIPS AND SAME-SEX MARRIAGES:
DISSOLUTION
KEY ISSUE : SHOULD COUPLES WHO ARE BOTH REGISTERED DOMESTIC
PARTNERS AND MARRIED COUPLES BE PERMITTED TO DISSOLVE BOTH
UNIONS IN A SINGLE PROCEEDING?
FISCAL EFFECT : As currently in print this bill is keyed fiscal.
SYNOPSIS
This non-controversial clean-up legislation, sponsored by
Equality California and the Conference of California Bar
Associations, seeks to correct a procedural problem for married
couples in California who are also registered domestic partners
and to clarify that same-sex married couples who wed
out-of-state, but are recognized in California, may dissolve
their unions in California. Many same-sex couples registered as
domestic partners when they had no option of marrying in
California. When same-sex marriages were allowed in California,
some of these couples later married, and those marriages remain
valid after passage of Proposition 8. As a result, some
same-sex couples are both married and registered domestic
partners.
As with all couples, some of these unions will not survive and
the parties will seek to dissolve them. Under current law,
these couples must both terminate their domestic partnership and
dissolve their marriage, which require identical court
proceedings. However, while the same law governs the two
proceedings, existing law requires that they be accomplished in
two separate proceedings. This bill allows these couples to
dissolve both their marriage and their domestic partnership in a
single proceeding, saving time and resources for both the
parties and the courts.
This bill also correctly clarifies that same-sex couples who
married out of California, and who are recognized in California
pursuant to SB 54, (Leno), Chap. 625, Stats. 2009, may dissolve
AB 2700
Page 2
their marriage in California. While this was certainly the
intention of last year's bill, some judges have suggested that
the current law should be made clearer to avoid any unintended
misunderstandings or misapplications.
SUMMARY : Permits couples that are both married and registered
domestic partners to dissolve both unions in a single court
proceeding. Specifically, this bill :
1)Permits parties to a registered domestic partnership who are
also married to each other to petition the court to dissolve
both their domestic partnership and their marriage in a single
proceeding.
2)Requires the Judicial Council to develop a form for the
proceeding in #1.
3)Clarifies that, in a dissolution proceeding, courts may
dissolve out-of-state, same-sex marriages recognized in
California.
EXISTING LAW :
1)Provides that the dissolution or nullity of a domestic
partnership and legal separation of domestic partners must
follow the same procedures, and the partners must possess the
same rights, protections and benefits and be subject to the
same responsibilities, obligations and duties, as apply to the
dissolution or nullity of a marriage or legal separation of
spouses, except as provided. (Family Code Section 299.
Unless stated otherwise all further references are to that
code.).
2)Allows for a simplified process to terminate a registered
domestic partnership if various conditions are met, including
that the union lasted not more than five years and there are
no children of the relationship. (Id.)
3)Allows for a simplified process to dissolve a marriage if
various conditions are met, including that the union lasted
not more than five years and there are no children of the
relationship. (Section 2400.)
4)Permits the court, in a proceeding for dissolution or nullity
of a marriage or for legal separation of the parties, to
AB 2700
Page 3
determine, among other things, the status of the marriage.
(Section 2010.)
COMMENTS : This clean-up legislation, sponsored by Equality
California and the Conference of Delegates of the State Bar,
seeks to correct a procedural problem for married couples in
California who are also registered domestic partners and to
clarify that same-sex, married couples who wed out-of-state, but
are recognized in California, may dissolve their unions in
California.
Simplified Procedure for Dissolving Relationships for Married
Couples Who are Also Domestic Partners : Many same-sex couples
registered as domestic partners in California when they had no
option of marrying. When same-sex marriages were allowed in
California, between the California Supreme Court decision in In
re Marriage Cases (2008) 43 Cal.4th 757 and before passage of
Proposition 8 in November 2009, some of these couples later
married. Those marriages remain valid even after passage of
Proposition 8. (Strauss v. Horton (2009) 46 Cal.4th 364,
473-74.) As a result, some same-sex couples are both married
and registered domestic partners.
As with all couples, some of these unions will not survive and
the parties will seek to dissolve them. Under current law,
these couples must both terminate their domestic partnership and
dissolve their marriage, which require identical court
proceedings. However, while the same law governs the two
proceedings, existing law requires that they be accomplished in
two separate proceedings. Requiring two separate - and
identical - proceedings significantly increases costs and time
for both the parties and the courts, without any apparent
benefit. This bill allows these couples to dissolve both their
marriage and their domestic partnership in a single proceeding,
saving time and resources for both the parties and the courts.
Additionally, since most family law litigants in California are
unrepresented by counsel, most same-sex couples terminating
their unions are likely to be doing so without the assistance of
counsel. Without legal counsel, these couples may not realize
that they need to terminate their marriage and their domestic
partnership in separate proceedings, and it is likely that at
least some couples will not dissolve their marriages. This in
turn could lead to significant legal complications in the
future, particularly if one party decides to remarry, without
AB 2700
Page 4
realizing that he or she may still be married. By letting
couples dissolve both unions in a single proceeding, this bill
will avoid those unnecessary complications.
Clarification to Last Year's SB 54 : This bill also clarifies a
provision in last year's SB 54, (Leno), Chap. 625, Stats. 2009.
That bill provided that, consistent with the constitutional
directive of the Supreme Court in In re Marriage Cases (2008) 43
Cal.4th 757, and Strauss v. Horton (2009) 46 Cal.4th 364,
same-sex couple who married outside of California after passage
of Proposition 8 are provided the same rights and obligations as
are granted to spouses in California, with the sole exception of
the designation of "marriage." Some judges suggested the law
should be clearer to ensure there are no misapplications
preventing these unions from properly dissolving. This bill
simply clarifies that, while these couples cannot use the
designation of marriage, courts may appropriately determine the
status of the marriages of these out-of-state, same-sex couples
in a dissolution proceeding.
REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION :
Support
Conference of California Bar Associations (co-sponsor)
Equality California (co-sponsor)
American Civil Liberties Union
Out & Equal Workplace Advocates
Transgender Law Center
Opposition
None on file
Analysis Prepared by : Leora Gershenzon / JUD. / (916) 319-2334