Bill Text: CA SCR83 | 2013-2014 | Regular Session | Chaptered
Bill Title: California Law Revision Commission: studies.
Spectrum: Partisan Bill (Democrat 1-0)
Status: (Passed) 2014-06-16 - Chaptered by Secretary of State. Res. Chapter 63, Statutes of 2014. [SCR83 Detail]
Download: California-2013-SCR83-Chaptered.html
BILL NUMBER: SCR 83 CHAPTERED
BILL TEXT
RESOLUTION CHAPTER 63
FILED WITH SECRETARY OF STATE JUNE 16, 2014
ADOPTED IN SENATE APRIL 7, 2014
ADOPTED IN ASSEMBLY JUNE 12, 2014
INTRODUCED BY Senator Monning
FEBRUARY 20, 2014
Relative to the California Law Revision Commission.
LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL'S DIGEST
SCR 83, Monning. California Law Revision Commission: studies.
Existing law requires the California Law Revision Commission to
study, and limits the commission to studying, topics approved by
resolution of the Legislature.
This measure would grant approval to the commission to continue
its study of designated topics that the Legislature previously
authorized or directed the commission to study.
The measure would require the commission, before commencing work
on any project within the calendar of topics the Legislature has
authorized or directed the commission to study, to submit a detailed
description of the scope of work to the chairs and vice chairs of the
Assembly Committee on Judiciary and the Senate Committee on
Judiciary, and any other policy committee that has jurisdiction over
the subject matter of the study, and if during the course of the
project there is a major change to the scope of work, submit a
description of the change. The measure would also invite a staff
member of the commission to appear and testify at any committee
hearing of a bill to implement a commission recommendation. The
measure would also request the commission to provide a copy of a
commission recommendation to each member of a policy committee that
is hearing a bill that would implement the recommendation.
WHEREAS, The California Law Revision Commission is authorized to
study topics set forth in the calendar contained in its report to the
Governor and the Legislature that have been or are thereafter
approved for study by concurrent resolution of the Legislature, and
topics that have been referred to the commission for study by
concurrent resolution of the Legislature or by statute; and
WHEREAS, The commission, in its annual report covering its
activities for 2013 and 2014, recommends continued study of 23
topics, all of which the Legislature has previously authorized or
directed the commission to study; now, therefore, be it
Resolved by the Senate of the State of California, the Assembly
thereof concurring, That the Legislature approves for continued study
by the California Law Revision Commission the topics listed below,
all of which the Legislature has previously authorized or directed
the commission to study:
(1) Whether the law should be revised that relates to creditors'
remedies, including, but not limited to, attachment, garnishment,
execution, repossession of property (including the claim and delivery
statute, self-help repossession of property, and the Commercial Code
provisions on repossession of property), confession of judgment
procedures, default judgment procedures, enforcement of judgments,
the right of redemption, procedures under private power of sale in a
trust deed or mortgage, possessory and nonpossessory liens,
insolvency, and related matters.
(2) Whether the California Probate Code should be revised,
including, but not limited to, the issue of whether California should
adopt, in whole or in part, the Uniform Probate Code, and related
matters.
(3) Whether the law should be revised that relates to real and
personal property, including, but not limited to, a marketable title
act, covenants, servitudes, conditions, and restrictions on land use
or relating to land, powers of termination, escheat of property and
the disposition of unclaimed or abandoned property, eminent domain,
quiet title actions, abandonment or vacation of public streets and
highways, partition, rights and duties attendant on assignment,
subletting, termination, or abandonment of a lease, and related
matters.
(4) Whether the law should be revised that relates to family law,
including, but not limited to, community property, the adjudication
of child and family civil proceedings, child custody, adoption,
guardianship, freedom from parental custody and control, and related
matters, including other subjects covered by the Family Code.
(5) Whether the law relating to discovery in civil cases should be
revised.
(6) Whether the law relating to the rights and disabilities of
minors and incompetent persons should be revised.
(7) Whether the Evidence Code should be revised.
(8) Whether the law relating to arbitration, mediation, and other
alternative dispute resolution techniques should be revised.
(9) Whether there should be changes to administrative law.
(10) Whether the law relating to the payment and the shifting of
attorney's fees between litigants should be revised.
(11) Whether the Uniform Unincorporated Nonprofit Association Act,
or parts of that uniform act, and related provisions should be
adopted in California.
(12) Recommendations to be reported pertaining to statutory
changes that may be necessitated by court unification.
(13) Whether the law of contracts should be revised, including the
law relating to the effect of electronic communications on the law
governing contract formation, the statute of frauds, the parol
evidence rule, and related matters.
(14) Whether the law governing common interest housing
developments should be revised to clarify the law, eliminate
unnecessary or obsolete provisions, consolidate existing statutes in
one place in the codes, establish a clear, consistent, and unified
policy with regard to formation and management of these developments
and transaction of real property interests located within them, and
to determine to what extent they should be subject to regulation.
(15) Whether the statutes of limitation for legal malpractice
actions should be revised to recognize equitable tolling or other
adjustment for the circumstances of simultaneous litigation, and
related matters.
(16) Whether the law governing disclosure of public records and
the law governing protection of privacy in public records should be
revised to better coordinate them, including consolidation and
clarification of the scope of required disclosure and creation of a
single set of disclosure procedures, to provide appropriate
enforcement mechanisms, and to ensure that the law governing
disclosure of public records adequately treats electronic
information, and related matters.
(17) Whether the law governing criminal sentences for enhancements
relating to weapons or injuries should be revised to simplify and
clarify the law and eliminate unnecessary or obsolete provisions.
(18) Whether the Subdivision Map Act (Division 2 (commencing with
Section 66410) of Title 7 of the Government Code) and the Mitigation
Fee Act (Chapter 5 (commencing with Section 66000), Chapter 6
(commencing with Section 66010), Chapter 7 (commencing with Section
66012), Chapter 8 (commencing with Section 66016), and Chapter 9
(commencing with Section 66020) of Division 1 of Title 7 of the
Government Code) should be revised to improve their organization,
resolve inconsistencies, and clarify and rationalize provisions, and
related matters.
(19) Whether the Uniform Statute and Rule Construction Act (1995)
should be adopted in California in whole or in part, and related
matters.
(20) Whether the law governing the place of trial in a civil case
should be revised.
(21) Analysis of the legal and policy implications of treating a
charter school as a public entity for the purposes of Division 3.6
(commencing with Section 810) of Title 1 of the Government Code.
(22) Whether the Fish and Game Code and related statutory law
should be revised to improve its organization, clarify its meaning,
resolve inconsistencies, eliminate unnecessary or obsolete
provisions, standardize terminology, clarify program authority and
funding sources, and make other minor improvements, without making
any significant substantive change to the effect of the law.
(23) (A) Analysis of the relationship under current law between
mediation confidentiality and attorney malpractice and other
misconduct, and the purposes for, and impact of, those laws on public
protection, professional ethics, attorney discipline, client rights,
the willingness of parties to participate in voluntary and mandatory
mediation, and the effectiveness of mediation, as well as any other
issues that the commission deems relevant. Among other matters, the
commission shall consider the following:
(i) Sections 703.5, 958, and 1119 of the Evidence Code and
predecessor provisions, as well as California court rulings,
including, but not limited to, Cassel v. Superior Court (2011) 51
Cal.4th 113, Porter v. Wyner (2010) 183 Cal.App.4th 949, and Wimsatt
v. Superior Court (2007) 152 Cal.App.4th 137.
(ii) The availability and propriety of contractual waivers.
(iii) The law in other jurisdictions, including the Uniform
Mediation Act, as it has been adopted in other states, other
statutory acts, scholarly commentary, judicial decisions, and any
data regarding the impact of differing confidentiality rules on the
use of mediation.
(B) In studying this matter, the commission shall request input
from experts and interested parties, including, but not limited to,
representatives from the California Supreme Court, the State Bar of
California, legal malpractice defense counsel, other attorney groups
and individuals, mediators, and mediation trade associations. The
commission shall make any recommendations that it deems appropriate
for the revision of California law to balance the competing public
interests between confidentiality and accountability; and be it
further
Resolved, That before commencing work on any project within the
calendar of topics the Legislature has authorized or directed the
commission to study, the commission shall submit a detailed
description of the scope of work to the chairs and vice chairs of the
Senate Committee on Judiciary and the Assembly Committee on
Judiciary, and any other policy committee that has jurisdiction over
the subject matter of the study, and if during the course of the
project there is a major change to the scope of work, submit a
description of the change; and be it further
Resolved, That the staff of the commission is invited to appear
and testify at any committee hearing of a bill to implement a
commission recommendation, for the purpose of explaining the
recommendation and answering questions posed by committee members,
provided that the staff may not advocate for the passage or defeat of
the legislation; and be it further
Resolved, That the commission is requested to provide a copy of a
commission recommendation to each member of a policy committee that
is hearing a bill that would implement the recommendation; and be it
further
Resolved, That the Secretary of the Senate transmit copies of this
resolution to the California Law Revision Commission and to the
author for appropriate distribution.
