BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    �






                             SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE
                         Senator Hannah-Beth Jackson, Chair
                              2013-2014 Regular Session


          SB 1343 (Wyland)
          As Amended April 21, 2014
          Hearing Date: May 6, 2014
          Fiscal: No
          Urgency: No
          TMW


                                        SUBJECT
                                           
                  Civil Procedure:  Property Subject to Attachment

                                      DESCRIPTION  

          Existing law, the Elder Abuse and Dependent Adult Civil  
          Protection Act (EADACPA), provides for prejudgment attachment to  
          the defendant's property in an elder or dependent adult  
          financial abuse case, subject to the limitations (i.e., certain  
          community property and property necessary for the support of the  
          defendant and defendant's family) under provisions in the Code  
          of Civil Procedure (Attachment Law).  This bill would amend the  
          Attachment Law to authorize prejudgment attachment to any  
          property of a defendant in an elder or dependent adult financial  
          abuse civil case.

                                      BACKGROUND  

          The Elder Abuse and Dependent Adult Civil Protection Act  
          (EADACPA) (Welf. & Inst. Code Sec. 15600 et seq.) was enacted in  
          1994 to provide protection for the growing number of elders and  
          dependent adults who were being victimized by unscrupulous  
          individuals, even by family members, but had little chance of  
          recovering money and property stolen from them.  The EADACPA's  
          intent was to encourage private attorneys to pursue claims of  
          abuse of an elder or dependent adult, including financial abuse,  
          by providing for enhanced remedies including recovery of  
          reasonable attorney's fees.  This intent had largely been  
          unrealized because many attorneys will not take these cases  
          because of the uncertainty of recovery.  To rectify this  
          problem, SB 611 (Steinberg, Ch. 45, Stats. 2011) authorized  
          prejudgment attachment of the defendant's property, subject to  
                                                                (more)



          SB 1343 (Wyland)
          Page 2 of ?



          exemptions under the Attachment Law (Code Civ. Proc. Sec.  
          487.010 et seq.), which helped to ensure some amount of recovery  
          in an elder or dependent adult financial abuse action.

          Attachment is an ancillary or provisional remedy to aid in the  
          collection of a money demand by seizure of property in advance  
          of trial and judgment.  The money or property is held as  
          security for eventual satisfaction of the judgment, unless  
          released by the giving of other security.  Attachment cannot be  
          invoked unless a main action has been properly initiated; it is  
          a remedy that is wholly statutory, and its scope and procedure  
          are defined and limited by the Attachment Law statutes.   
          Attachment Law limits the use of attachments to commercial  
          transactions and prohibits them in consumer transactions.

          This bill would extend the existing prejudgment attachment  
          statute to authorize an elder or dependent adult financial abuse  
          victim to attach any of the defendant's property before the  
          defendant has been found liable. 

                                CHANGES TO EXISTING LAW
           
           Existing law  , the Elder Abuse and Dependent Adult Civil  
          Protection Act (EADACPA), provides civil remedies to victims of  
          elder or dependent adult physical abuse, neglect, abduction, or  
          financial abuse, including recovery of damages and attorney's  
          fees.  (Welf. & Inst. Code Sec. 15600 et seq.)

           Existing law  requires a showing by a preponderance of the  
          evidence that a defendant is liable for financial abuse of an  
          elder or dependent adult.  However, in order to recover damages  
          for pain, suffering, or disfigurement on behalf of a deceased  
          elder or dependent adult, existing law also requires proof by  
          clear and convincing evidence that the defendant has been guilty  
          of recklessness, oppression, fraud, or malice in the commission  
          of the abuse.  (Welf. & Inst. Code Sec. 15657.5.)

           Existing law  provides that, notwithstanding the prejudgment  
          attachment requirements under the Code of Civil Procedure, an  
          attachment may be issued in any action for damages for financial  
          abuse of an elder or dependent adult.  Existing law specifies  
          that the other provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure not  
          inconsistent with this authorization shall govern the issuance  
          of an attachment.  Existing law also provides that an attachment  
          may be issued whether or not other forms of relief are demanded.  
           (Welf. & Inst. Code Sec. 15657.01.)
                                                                      



          SB 1343 (Wyland)
          Page 3 of ?




           Existing law  , the Attachment Law (Code Civ. Proc. Sec. 481.010  
          et seq.), secures the assets of a debtor through seizure of the  
          debtor's assets prior to litigation and judgment of a creditor's  
          claim.  The Attachment Law provides for a noticed hearing on a  
          petition for a writ of attachment (in exceptional circumstances,  
          an ex parte petition may be filed), with a supporting affidavit  
          detailing the property to be attached, the amount to be secured,  
          and, if appropriate, an estimate of attorney's fees and costs.   
          Existing law also provides for a defendant to oppose the order  
          of attachment by filing of a notice of opposition and supporting  
          affidavit, or by filing a claim of exemption for exempt  
          property, as defined.  (Code Civ. Proc. Sec. 483.010 et seq.)

           Existing law  provides that the following property of a defendant  
          is subject to attachment:
           where the defendant is a corporation, all corporate property  
            for which a method of levy is provided by statute;
           where the defendant is a partnership or other unincorporated  
            association, all partnership or association property for which  
            a method of levy is provided by statute; and
           where the defendant is a natural person, all of the following  
            property:
             o    interests in real property except leasehold estates with  
               unexpired terms of less than one year;
             o    accounts receivable, chattel paper, and general  
               intangibles arising out of the conduct by the defendant of  
               a trade, business, or profession, except any such  
               individual claim with a principal balance of less than  
               $150;
             o    equipment;
             o    farm products;
             o    inventory;
             o    final money judgments arising out of the conduct by the  
               defendant of a trade, business, or profession;
             o    money on the premises where a trade, business, or  
               profession is conducted by the defendant and, except for  
               the first $1,000, money located elsewhere than on such  
               premises and deposit accounts, but, if the defendant has  
               more than one deposit account or has at least one deposit  
               account and money located elsewhere than on the premises  
               where a trade, business, or profession is conducted by the  
               defendant, the court, upon application of the plaintiff,  
               may order that the writ of attachment be levied so that an  
               aggregate amount of $1,000 in the form of such money and in  
               such accounts remains free of levy;
                                                                      



          SB 1343 (Wyland)
          Page 4 of ?



             o    negotiable documents of title;
             o    instruments;
             o    securities; and
             o    minerals or the like (including oil and gas) to be  
               extracted.  (Code Civ. Proc. Sec. 487.010(a)-(c).)

           Existing law  provides that where the defendant is a natural  
          person whose property listed above is community property, that  
          community property is subject to attachment if the community  
          property would be subject to enforcement of the judgment  
          obtained in the action in which the attachment is sought.   
          Unless the provision or context otherwise requires, if community  
          property that is subject to attachment is sought to be attached:  
          (1) if attachment applies to any property of that defendant or  
          to obligations owed to the defendant, then it also applies to  
          the community property interest of the spouse of the defendant  
          and to obligations owed to either spouse that are community  
          property; and
          (2) if attachment applies to property in the possession or under  
          the control of the defendant, then it also applies to community  
          property in the possession or under the control of the spouse of  
          the defendant.  (Code Civ. Proc. Sec. 487.010(d).)

           Existing law  provides that, except as provided under the Uniform  
          Fraudulent Transfer Act (Civ. Code Sec. 3439), the following  
          property is exempt from attachment:
           all property exempt from enforcement of a money judgment;
           property which is necessary for the support of a defendant who  
            is a natural person or the family of such defendant supported  
            in whole or in part by the defendant;
           earnings; and
           all property not listed in the attachment statute.  (Code Civ.  
            Proc. Sec. 487.020.)

           This bill  would add to the above list of property subject to  
          attachment, in the case of an attachment issued in an elder or  
          dependent adult financial case, any property of the defendant.

                                        COMMENT
           
          1.  Stated need for the bill

           The author writes:

            The procedures for obtaining a writ of attachment are provided  
            by [Code of Civil Procedure Section] 481.010 et seq.  In  
                                                                      



          SB 1343 (Wyland)
          Page 5 of ?



            general, attachment is only available in commercial  
            transactions and limits the property of the defendant subject  
            to attachment to commercial property.  Nevertheless, [Welfare  
            & Institutions Code Section] 15657.01 authorizes the issuance  
            of a writ of attachment in "any action for damages" for  
            financial abuse.  While some instances of financial abuse  
            arise in commercial transactions, most arise between  
            individuals, such as when a child wrongfully takes the  
            property of an elderly parent.  In such a situation, while the  
            elder is authorized to obtain a writ of attachment by [Welfare  
            & Institutions Code Section] 15657.01, [Code of Civil  
            Procedure Section] 487.010 limits the property of the  
            defendant subject to attachment to commercial property, of  
            which there is none.  Accordingly, the effectiveness of the  
            attachment procedure is greatly limited in most financial  
            abuse cases. 

            This bill revises [Code of Civil Procedure Section] 487.010 to  
            provide that for orders of attachment issued for financial  
            abuse matters, any property of the defendant is subject to  
            attachment.

          2.  Attachment: use and procedure
             
          Attachment is a well-established procedure that, when used  
          correctly according to the statutory scheme, seizes and imposes  
          lien rights on the defendant's property, and secures for the  
          plaintiff a fund from which any later judgment may be satisfied.  
           The attachment procedure provides numerous safeguards against  
          abuse and requires judicial oversight.  Among other things, the  
          plaintiff must demonstrate a probability of success at a noticed  
          hearing and usually must post a bond for 150 percent of the  
          amount attached in order to protect the defendant from loss in  
          the event plaintiff's action is unsuccessful.  Further,  
          attachment permits a plaintiff to determine early in the case  
          whether proceeding with the litigation is justified, especially  
          if the defendant's financial status is in question.  If the  
          plaintiff's case is strong and demonstrated at the hearing on  
          the attachment order, attachment could result in an early  
          resolution of the case.  Attachment is almost never pursued  
          where a defendant is financially secure because it would not be  
          necessary nor would the attachment justify the cost and effort  
          of obtaining the writ.  Generally, attachment is authorized only  
          where the following conditions apply:
           the claim is a contract claim for money (Code Civ. Proc. Sec.  
            483.010(a));
                                                                      



          SB 1343 (Wyland)
          Page 6 of ?



           a minimum amount is claimed (Code Civ. Proc. Sec. 483.010(a));
           the claim is not secured or the security is valueless (Code  
            Civ. Proc. Sec. 483.010(b)); and
           the claim arises out of a commercial transaction (Code Civ.  
            Proc. Sec. 483.010(a)).

          While attachment is generally available only for claims arising  
          out of commercial transactions (and not for consumer  
          transactions), the remedy has been made applicable by statute to  
          other situations as follows: 
           an action by the Director of Food and Agriculture to recover  
            fees (Food & Ag. Code Sec. 281);
           attaching a vessel with all furnishings when summons is served  
            (Harbor & Nav. Code Sec. 495.1);
           an action for recovery of public funds paid to person engaged  
            in unlawful sale of controlled substances (Health & Saf. Code  
            Sec. 11501);
           an action to collect sales and use tax (Rev. and Tax. Code  
            Sec. 6713);
           an action of an injured worker against his or her employer  
            (Labor Code Sec. 3707);
           mechanic's liens (Civ. Code Sec. 3152);
           a lien foreclosure suit involving manufactured timber products  
            (Civ. Code Sec. 3065a); and
           a civil action filed under the Elder Abuse and Dependent Adult  
            Civil Protection Act (EADACPA) for elder or dependent adult  
            physical abuse, neglect, or financial abuse (Welf. & Inst.  
            Code Sec. 15657.01).

          A writ of attachment empowers the plaintiff (abused elder or  
          dependent adult or their personal representative) to levy on the  
          defendant's assets (including property of plaintiff wrongfully  
          taken) through the sheriff, who will take possession of the  
          property or funds or impose liens on the property.  The  
          defendant is protected through an undertaking (a bond) that the  
          plaintiff is required to post prior to issuance of the writ.  To  
          obtain the writ of attachment, the plaintiff must show the  
          probable validity of the claim of financial abuse, and not  
          necessarily a showing of irreparable harm.

          3.  Due process and legislative history  

          Existing law authorizes a plaintiff in an elder or dependent  
          adult financial abuse action to attach the defendant's property,  
          subject to specified exemptions.  This bill would expand the  
          ability for elder and dependent adult financial abuse victims to  
                                                                      



          SB 1343 (Wyland)
          Page 7 of ?



          obtain prejudgment attachment of any of the defendant's  
          property, without exemption. 

          A review of the legislative history of SB 611 (Steinberg, Ch.  
          45, Stats. 2007), the bill that added the existing EADACPA  
          attachment provision, shows that, initially, it would have  
          amended the Attachment Law to provide for financial abuse case  
          attachment.  That bill was amended in this Committee to instead  
          provide for attachment under EADACPA.  SB 611 was negotiated  
          through various stakeholders, including proponents of this bill,  
          and was approved by this Committee with specified terms.   
          However, this bill potentially unravels that negotiated language  
          and provides for broader property attachment than that provided  
          for any other civil case.  This broad attachment also  
          potentially runs afoul of well-established attachment  
          limitations and concerns about due process.  

          A review of legislative and case history reveals that the  
          existing limited scope of property subject to attachment and the  
          judicial processes required therefor came after the California  
          Supreme Court held that California's attachment scheme existing  
          at that time was unconstitutional and in violation of the Fifth  
          and Fourteenth Amendments because the statute authorized the  
          deprivation of a debtor's property without prior notice or  
          hearing, and had not been narrowly drawn to confine such  
          deprivation to extraordinary circumstances in which a state or  
          creditor's interest of overriding significance might justify  
          summary procedures.  (Randone v. Appellate Dep't of Superior  
          Court (1971) 5 Cal.3d 536, 540.)

          Subsequently, the attachment law was significantly revised and  
          discussed further in Advance Transformer Co. v. Superior Court  
          (1974) 44 Cal.App.3d 127, 140-141, in which the court noted that  
          "[b]oth the provisions of the Act and its legislative history  
          indicate that its purpose was to restore, on an interim basis,  
          the availability of attachments in commercial actions only and  
          to limit its applicability even in such actions so as to  
          eliminate specific objections voiced in Randone to the then  
          existing attachment procedures.  The purpose of the Act, which  
          was Senate Bill 1048, is described in Comment, Attachment in  
          California, 4 Pacific Law Journal 146, 152, as follows:  'The  
          main purpose of Senate Bill 1048 is to restore the attachment  
          remedy in commercial situations in which one business has  
          furnished goods on credit or loaned money to another business.'  
          [Citation omitted.] . . .While the Court in Randone was  
          concerned about the plight of a poor consumer in rendering its  
                                                                      



          SB 1343 (Wyland)
          Page 8 of ?



          decision, it considered it necessary to declare the attachment  
          statutes unconstitutional in toto, and indicated that it was not  
          the responsibility of the Court to revise the statute so as to  
          save those portions which could constitutionally be applied."   
          The court further noted that Act also sought to "[eliminate the]  
          Supreme Court's objection to the extreme hardship which the use  
          of attachment procedures in consumer cases often entailed."   
          (Id.)

          This bill reignites the due process concerns discussed in  
          Randone as a result of the broad attachment authorization on the  
          defendant's property, potentially without notice and hearing,  
          because existing attachment law provides for ex parte  
          application and issuance of an attachment (without prior notice  
          of attachment given to the defendant).  The existing limitations  
          on attachment include all property exempt from enforcement of a  
          money judgment, property which is necessary for the support of a  
          defendant who is a natural person or the family of such  
          defendant supported in whole or in part by the defendant, and  
          the defendant's earnings.  (Code Civ. Proc. Sec. 487.020.)   
          However, this bill would authorize attachment of all money  
          earned by the defendant and all property otherwise necessary for  
          the support of the defendant or the defendant's family,  
          potentially without any notice to the defendant or opportunity  
          to claim an exemption before the property was attached.  This  
          potentially could force the defendant and the defendant's family  
          into insolvency and potentially requiring state and federal  
          financial assistance.  

          Although no opposition to this bill has been received by staff,  
          a proponent acknowledges that there are no known instances where  
          the financial abuse victim was unable to adequately attach  
          property of the defendant, but he is concerned that a savvy  
          defendant or his or her attorney may finally claim an  
          appropriate attachment exemption because the property specified  
          in the plaintiff's application for writ of attachment is not  
          statutorily authorized to be attached.  The proponent also  
          acknowledges that there may be some concern about the lack of  
          any exemptions authorized by this bill.  To address this  
          concern, the author proposes to amend the bill to limit  
          attachment of certain community property if that property would  
          be subject to enforcement of the judgment.  However, this  
          amendment merely incorporates the existing community property  
          limitation over property the plaintiff is already authorized to  
          attach.  Yet, it does not address any other type of community  
          property not specifically listed in the attachment statute,  
                                                                      



          SB 1343 (Wyland)
          Page 9 of ?



          which could be attached under this bill.  

          Further, the proponent asserts that the attachment exemption  
          statute (which the defendant must use in a timely manner to  
          assert an exemption of property from attachment) would properly  
          provide the defendant the ability to claim an established  
          exemption.  However, despite that argument, this bill clearly  
          states that for an EADACPA financial abuse victim, "any property  
          of the defendant" is subject to attachment, thus, nothing is  
          exempt.  

          The Committee should consider whether it is appropriate to  
          authorize attachment of all of the defendant's property,  
          potentially in violation of due process protections, leading to  
          insolvency, before the defendant is even proven liable for the  
          allegations.  Furthermore, given that the plaintiff must post a  
          bond to cover the attachment, it is unclear whether the  
          plaintiff could afford to attach all of the defendant's  
          property.

          SHOULD THIS BILL AUTHORIZE ATTACHMENT OVER ALL OF THE  
          DEFENDANT'S PROPERTY WITHOUT ANY EXEMPTION OTHERWISE RECOGNIZED  
          UNDER ATTACHMENT LAW?


           Support  :  None Known

           Opposition  :  None Known

                                        HISTORY
           
           Source  :  Author

           Related Pending Legislation  :  None Known

           Prior Legislation  :  

          SB 611 (Steinberg, Ch. 45, Stats. 2007) See Background; Comment  
          3.

          SB 1048 (Zenovich and Coombs, Ch. 550, Stats. 1972) See  
          Background; Comment 3.

                                   **************
                                          

                                                                      



          SB 1343 (Wyland)
          Page 10 of ?