BILL ANALYSIS
SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE
Senator Ellen M. Corbett, Chair
2009-2010 Regular Session
SB 556 S
Committee on Judiciary B
As Introduced
Hearing Date: March 31, 2009 5
Code of Civil Procedure; Revenue and Taxation Code 5
ADM:jd 6
SUBJECT
Court Operations: Post-judgment Fees; Unpaid Bail
DESCRIPTION
This bill would require the clerk of the court in a small claims
court judgment to charge and collect all fees associated with
the enforcement of judgments under the Enforcement of Judgments
Law (EJL).
This bill would provide that bail is included among the unpaid
court-ordered fines and penalties that the court may refer to
the Franchise Tax Board (FTB) for collection after 90 days of
delinquency.
BACKGROUND
Post-judgment fees in small claims proceedings
The Small Claims Act (SCA) (Code of Civil Procedure Section
116.110 et seq.) states that small claims judgments may be
enforced like other judgments as provided in the EJL. However,
the SCA specifies post-judgment fees only with regard to the
issuance of a writ of execution, application for an order of
examination of a judgment debtor, and issuance of an abstract of
judgment. The fee charged in such matters is the same as that
charged for the enforcement of any civil judgment. This bill
would clarify that a court is authorized to charge the same fees
for post-judgment enforcement motions of small claims judgments
as is charged for enforcement of civil judgments.
Collection of unpaid bail amounts
(more)
SB 556 (Committee on Judiciary)
Page 2 of ?
There are two Franchise Tax Board (FTB) programs courts use to
assist in the collection of court-ordered debt. The FTB's Tax
Intercept Program (FTB-TIP) collects debt by sweeping state tax
refunds. The FTB's Court-Ordered Debt Program (FTB-COD)
collects debt by sweeping bank accounts and lottery winnings.
Currently, although courts have explicit statutory authority to
send unpaid bail amounts to the FTB-TIP, the statute is silent
regarding whether courts may send similar amounts to the
FTB-COD. This bill would clarify that unpaid bail amounts may
be sent to the FTB, regardless of which FTB program, for
collection.
CHANGES TO EXISTING LAW
1.Existing law provides for the enforcement of a small claims
court judgment and requires the clerk to charge and collect
specified fees for the issuance of a writ of enforcement, an
abstract of judgment, or an order of examination of a judgment
debtor. (Code of Civil Procedure (CCP) Section 116.820.)
Existing law , the EJL, generally governs the enforcement of
monetary, non-monetary, and third-party claims, and the
satisfaction of judgments. (CCP Section 680.010 et seq.)
This bill would require the clerk of the court in a small
claims court judgment to charge and collect all fees
associated with the enforcement of judgments under the EJL.
2.Existing law provides that fines, state or local penalties,
forfeitures, restitution orders, or any other amounts imposed
by a superior court upon a person or any other entity that are
due and payable in an amount totaling no less than $100, in
the aggregate, for criminal offenses, may, no sooner than 90
days after payment of that amount becomes delinquent, be
referred by the court, the county, or the state to the FTB for
collection. (Revenue and Taxation Code Section 19280.)
This bill would add bail to the list of unpaid debt permitted
to be referred to the FTB for collection.
COMMENT
1.Stated need for the bill
The sponsor, the Judicial Council (JC), writes:
SB 556 (Committee on Judiciary)
Page 3 of ?
Post-judgment fees clarification
The [SCA] does not identify a fee for a variety of
post-judgment motions, including a motion opposing a claim of
exemption or a motion to "reset" or continue examination of a
judgment debtor, which occur routinely in the enforcement of a
small claims judgment. Since such motions are similar to
motions for the enforcement of any other civil judgment, the
fee for such a motion in a general civil case would also be
the appropriate fee to be charged in small claims cases. As a
result of the lack of clarity in the statute, practices differ
from court to court. SB 556 would clarify that a court is
authorized to charge the same fees for post-judgment motions
related to the enforcement of a small claims judgment as a
court charges for the enforcement of a regular civil judgment
under [the EJL]. Senate Bill 556 would bring uniformity to
court practices across all small claims courts.
Collection of unpaid bail amounts
There are two FTB programs courts use to assist in the
collection of court-ordered debt. [See Background for
details.] [While] courts have explicit statutory authority to
send unpaid bail amounts to the FTB-TIP, the statute is silent
regarding whether the courts may send similar amounts to the
FTB-COD. There is no apparent basis (either in legislative
history or court practice) for allowing certain debts to be
collected by FTB-TIP, but not FTB-COD. Most courts currently
refer failure-to-appear (FTA) cases to either FTB-TIP or
FTB-COD, and the amount owed as bail is collected by either
program.
Recently, however, some courts have been concerned that they
might not have the statutory authority to send FTA cases to
the FTB-COD. This bill would explicitly authorize the courts
to send unpaid bail amounts to either FTB program for
collection.
2.Both provisions of SB 556 passed the Legislature in 2008
The identical post-judgment fee provision that is in SB 556 was
included in AB 1873 (Lieu, 2008). The bill was vetoed on
grounds other than the post-judgment fee provision.
With respect to unpaid bail amounts, the Legislature clarified
SB 556 (Committee on Judiciary)
Page 4 of ?
its intent to allow courts to send FTB collection cases to
either FTB-TIP or FTB-COD in AB 1389 (Committee on Budget,
Chapter 751,Statutes of 2008). Although AB 1389 was enacted
into law, it was inadvertently chaptered out by the subsequent
enactment of AB 2928 (Spitzer, Chapter 752, Statutes of 2008).
Interestingly, because AB 1389 was an urgency statute that took
effect immediately upon the Governor's signature and AB 2928 did
not take effect until January 1, 2009, the JC-sponsored
clarification was in effect from September 30 to December 31,
2008.
3.Post-judgment fees
The JC reports that post-judgment related fees range from $15 to
$40 depending upon the nature of the motion or application.
Support : American Federation of State, County and Municipal
Employees
Opposition : None Known
HISTORY
Source : Judicial Council of California
Related Pending Legislation : None Known
Prior Legislation :
AB 1873 (Lieu, 2008), among other provisions, required the clerk
of the court to charge and collect all fees associated with the
enforcement of judgments as provided in the Code of Civil
Procedure, Enforcement of Judgments. This bill was vetoed.
AB 1389 (Committee on Budget, Chapter 751, Statutes of 2008),
among other things, clarified that bail is included among the
unpaid court-ordered fines and penalties that the court may
refer to the FTB for collection after 90 days of delinquency.
**************
SB 556 (Committee on Judiciary)
Page 5 of ?