BILL ANALYSIS �
SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE
Senator Hannah-Beth Jackson, Chair
2013-2014 Regular Session
AB 2745 (Committee on Judiciary)
As Introduced
Hearing Date: June 17, 2014
Fiscal: Yes
Urgency: No
NR
SUBJECT
Courts
DESCRIPTION
This bill would authorize the Judicial Council to convert 10
subordinate judicial officer positions to judgeships in the
2014-2015 year, if the conversion would result in a judge being
assigned to a family law or juvenile law assignment, as
specified.
This bill would also authorize the Judicial Council to increase
the procedures for family centered case resolution.
BACKGROUND
In a 2010 report, the Judicial Council analyzed the need for
more judges in California's courts. The Council compared the
amount of judges necessary for court operation with the amount
of judicial positions authorized and funded, and determined that
there was a shortfall of 14 percent. Existing law permits
litigants to stipulate to the use of an attorney, appointed by
the trial court, to serve as a temporary judge to preside over
their matter. These temporary judges are known as subordinate
judicial officers (SJOs). According to the Judicial Council,
the current shortfall in available judges has led to SJOs
spending an average of 55 percent of their time working as
temporary judges, and in large courts, that number approaches 75
to 80 percent. This bill, which, in part, is nearly identical
to SB 405 (Corbett, Ch. 705, Stats. 2011) and last year's AB
1403 (Committee on Judiciary, Ch. 510, Stats. 2013) seeks to
ensure that a greater number of family and juvenile law cases
(more)
AB 2745 (Committee on Judiciary)
Page 2 of ?
are presided over by judges, rather than SJOs. Accordingly,
this bill would ratify the Judicial Council's authority to
convert 10 subordinate judicial officers (SJO) to judgeships in
the next year, provided those judges replace SJOs in family or
juvenile law cases. This bill would also allow the Judicial
Council to increase the procedures for family centered case
resolution set forth in statute.
CHANGES TO EXISTING LAW
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.)
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:
AB 2745 (Committee on Judiciary)
Page 3 of ?
The Judicial Council has identified family and juvenile law
cases as among those most important for judges, rather than
SJOs, to preside over. Unlike judges, SJOs are not directly
accountable to the public. Unfortunately, due to the
shortages of judges, SJOs today are performing some of the
most complex and sensitive judicial duties, including
presiding over family and juvenile law matters. Conversion of
these positions to judgeships when they become vacant makes
them both more accountable to the public and helps provide
better trust and confidence in the courts.
2.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.)
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, Ch. 690,
Stats. 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, Ch. 705, Stats. 2011) and
last year through AB 1403 (Ch. 510, Stats. 2013). This bill
AB 2745 (Committee on Judiciary)
Page 4 of ?
seeks to provide the Judicial Council with that same
ratification for 2014-2015.
3.Family-centered case resolution
With the exception of family law, all general civil and criminal
cases have procedures in place that allow the court to control
the process and pacing of the case in order to ensure a fair,
timely, and just resolution. However, family courts have
historically not been granted the normal authority of other
civil courts to control their case scheduling without both
parties' consent. As a result, one party can potentially drag
out a case for a very long time in the hopes of forcing the
other party to agree to an unfavorable settlement. In order to
modernize and align family court practices with those of other
courts, AB 939 (Committee on Judiciary, Ch. 352, Stats. 2010)
authorized courts to order a family-centered case resolution
plan even in the absence of a stipulation by the parties.
Family law case management has now been implemented across the
state and is helping the courts serve families. This bill would
not change any requirement concerning case management, but would
allow the Judicial Council, by rule of court, to increase
requirements of case management.
Support : Judicial Council of California
Opposition : None Known
HISTORY
Source : Author
Related Pending Legislation : None Known
Prior Legislation :
SB 1190 (Jackson) would have authorized an additional 50 judges,
funded a prior set of 50 judges, and increased the number of
justices from seven to nine in the Fourth Appellate District
Court of Appeal. This bill was held under submission in the
Senate Appropriations Committee.
AB 1403 (Committee on Judiciary, Chapter 510, Statutes of 2013)
AB 2745 (Committee on Judiciary)
Page 5 of ?
See Comment 2.
SB 405 (Corbett, Chapter 705, Statutes of 2011) See Comment 2.
AB 2763 (Committee on Judiciary, Chapter 690, Statutes of 2010)
See Comment 2.
AB 939 (Committee on Judiciary, Chapter 352, Statutes of 2010)
See Comment 3.
AB 159 (Jones, Chapter 722, Statutes of 2007) permitted upon
legislative authorization, the conversion of up to 162 existing
subordinate SJO positions to judgeships in eligible superior
courts upon a vacancy of an SJO position, provided that no more
than 16 subordinate judicial officer positions may be converted
in any calendar year.
Prior Vote :
Assembly Floor (Ayes 76, Noes 0)
Assembly Appropriations Committee (Ayes 17, Noes 0)
Assembly Judiciary Committee (Ayes 10, Noes 0)
**************