HOUSE COMMITTEE ON JUDICIARY

 

 

January 28, 2003   Hearing Room 357

1:00 pm Tapes  17 - 18

 

MEMBERS PRESENT:            Rep. Max Williams, Chair

Rep. Robert Ackerman Vice-Chair

Rep. Gordon Anderson, Vice-Chair

Rep. Jeff  Barker

Rep. Jerry Krummel

Rep. Greg Macpherson

Rep. Floyd Prozanski

Rep. Lane Shetterly

MEMBER EXCUSED:

Rep. Bob Jenson

 

STAFF PRESENT:                  Bill Joseph, Counsel

 Nancy Massee,  Committee Assistant

 

MEASURE/ISSUES HEARD:        

HB 2049 Public Hearing

HB 2053 Public Hearing

HB 2087 Public Hearing and Work Session

HB 2270 Public Hearing

 

These minutes are in compliance with Senate and House Rules.  Only text enclosed in quotation marks reports a speaker’s exact words.  For complete contents, please refer to the tapes.

 

TAPE/#

Speaker

Comments

Tape 17, A

006

Chair Williams

Opens meeting at 1:10 p.m.  Announces field trip to Oregon Youth Authority on Friday.  Opens public hearing on HB 2049.

HB 2049  PUBLIC HEARING

014

Bill Joseph

Committee Counsel.  Explains HB 2049 which relates to punitive damages; creating new provisions; and amending ORS 18.535.

031

Chair Williams

Refers to John Kaempf letter, requestor of the bill (EXHIBIT A).

038

Joseph

Mentions issues of trial lawyers regarding HB 2049.

079

Rep. Shetterly

Asks for time to review concerns about the bill.

080

Susan Grabe

Oregon State Bar Public Affairs Program.  States the Procedures and Practices Committee wishes to look at this bill.

092

Joseph

Comments about adding a “safe harbor” provision so that the judge would have discretion to allow motion to amend under certain circumstances.

105

Chair Williams

Asks the Oregon State Bar (OSB) to facilitate language in the bill with Counsel Joseph.

110

Chair Williams

Closes public hearing on HB 2049.  Opens public hearing on 2053.

HB 2053 PUBLIC HEARING

114

Counsel Joseph

Explains HB 2053 which relates to small claims in circuit court. 

142

Jim Markee

Oregon Collectors Association.  Discusses forms used in small claims departments.  Wants the statutes to authorize standardize forms (EXHIBIT B).

191

Rep. Krummel

Asks if municipal courts hear small claims issues. Why would other than standardized forms be used?

205

Markee

Describes the committee that endorses forms. Does not object to use of other forms in addition to standardized forms.

208

Bradd Swank

Special Counsel, State Court Administrator.  Explains how their office appeals to the public for comments on procedures of  Uniform Trial Court Rules Committee (UTCR) (EXHIBIT C).

290

Swank

Clarifies what the administrator’s office suggests.  Discusses small claims courts. Discusses Chief Justice’s rules.  Discusses municipal courts and small claims. Supports standardized forms.  Wants minor changes in the bill.   

353

Rep. Shetterly

Asks if the UTCR procedures take care of the fiscal impact.

355

Swank

Replies there was not money to inventory all the forms in the state.

400

Rep. Anderson

Asks if there is a date certain to go to the mandated forms.

401

Swank

Replies the UTCR form is targeted for August 2003.   When the forms would run out is not known, however, there will most likely always be some local control.

439

Markee

Has no problem with any amendment stating courts can accept forms other than the standard. Emphasizes the need for a standard form that is accepted by all courts.

TAPE 18, A

030

Markee

Continues supporting standard forms but acceptance of other forms.

038

Rep. Shetterly

Comments that municipal courts do not have small claims jurisdiction.

050

Chair Williams

Reiterates that if the courts that have forms that they use now would be accepted by the courts but standardized forms could accepted by all courts.

055

Swank

Explains there is a process in place to address the problem.

077

Markee

Emphasizes moving forward with the standardized forms. Discusses the small claims departments.

079

Rep. Prozanski

Compares forms from small counties and large counties.

089

Rep. Shetterly

Discusses small claims’ jurisdiction. Asks why they have power to determine the direction where forms go.

108

Rep. Prozanski

Asks for a time frame on comment on the rules, March or April?

116

Swank

States there is a March 21 meeting at the Court Administrator’s office and the committee’s recommendation will be made known then. States the Chief Justice does not always agree with the committee.

130

Rep. Barker

Comments that justice courts ought to use standardized forms.   

137

Swank

Explains the historical use of court forms and the reasons for uniformity.  The former practices were to use forms tailored to their business.

155

Chair Williams

Suggests working with the justice courts towards uniform forms.  Continues to talk about this issue.  Closes public hearing on HB 2053.  Opens Public hearing on HB 2087.

HB 2087  PUBLIC HEARING

176

Counsel Joseph

Explains HB 2087 which relates to the Council on Court Procedures; amending ORS 1.730 and 1.735.

192

Judge Karston Rasmussen

Lane County.  Explains why the Council on Court Procedures should make changes to proposed rules in response to public comment.  (EXHIBIT D)  Explains that notice language at the present does not allow the council to make rule changes. Refers to line 18 of HB 2087. Comments that referral to Ways and Means does not seem necessary.

277

Chair Williams

Agrees that this bill does not need referral to the Ways and Means committee.

294

Rep. Shetterly

Suggests getting the fiscal impact statement.

300

Rep. Prozanski

Suggests passing to the floor.

322

Chair Williams

States that the Speaker’s office approval is needed.  Wants the rescinding language first.

358

Bill Joseph

Comments that fiscal statement impact may be available now.

365

Chair Williams

Closes public hearing on HB 2087. Opens public hearing on HB 2270

HB 2270 PUBLIC HEARING

378

Bernard Vail

Oregon State Bar Committee, Northwestern School of Law.  Supports HB 2270 which relates to spouses. Provides beneficiary in a will under divorce is automatically revoked HB 2270 consolidates the law of wills and will substitutes (EXHIBIT E).

420

Rep. Shetterly

Asks about Section 2, the definition of “governing instrument.” Asks about Section 4 language.

TAPE 17, B

 

 

 

044

Vail

Replies that in the possibility of predeceased persons, an anti-lapse statute might change the line of lineal descendents. Whereas with a disclaimer there is not the problem. Discusses Uniform Probate Code policy.

084

Rep. Macpherson

Discusses retirement plans subject to federal regulation.  Asks what authority there is.

113

Vail

Replies stating a precedent, Egelhoff. Refers to ERISA plans.

123

Rep. Ackerman

Asks if the bill provides for a form of notice.  Says the insurance companies need to determine what the notice should state. Asks for clarifying amendments.  Refers to Section 6 sub 3, asks to identify the process as inter-pleader proceedings.

175

Rep. Barker

Asks if the committee considered the intent of the insured.

225

Vail

Replies the committee paralleled the will statute.  Discusses presumptions based on what most people want.

246

Rep. Shetterly

Asks for more time to look at the bill.

272

Rep. Macpherson

Asks for more discussions on the language.

279

Rep. Krummel

Refers to Section 6, sub 1.  Asks if that is a bailout for the insurance company.

285

Vail

Replies yes, and explains the provision. Explains disputes between spouses not between insurance company and spouses.

319

Chair Williams

Refers to e-mail from John Powell regarding presumptions and the Egelhoff and ERISA issues. Asks if the insured names the ex-wife as beneficiary after the divorce, is that impacted. 

342

Vail

Replies that is correct because the divorce provokes a pre-existing beneficiary designation.

352

Chair Williams

Asks the OSB and parties to further discuss these questions.  Asks for other testimony.  Closes HB 2270 public hearing.  Work Session opened on HB 2087.

HB 2087  WORK SESSION

390

Chair Williams

MOTION:  Moves  to rescind referral to Ways and Means Committee of HB 2087.

391

Chair Williams

Hearing no objection, declares the motion CARRIED.

392

Chair Williams

MOTION:  Moves HB 2087 to the floor with a DO PASS recommendation.

 

 

VOTE:  7-0-2

EXCUSED:  2 - Jenson, Barker

393

Chair Williams

Hearing no objection, declares the motion CARRIED.

REP. PROZANSKI will lead discussion on the floor.

394

Chair Williams

MOTION:  Requests unanimous consent that the rules be SUSPENDED to allow REP. BARKER to BE RECORDED as voting AYE on the " MOTION:  Moves HB 2087 to the floor with a DO PASS recommendation.”

395

Chair Williams

Adjourns meeting at 2:30 p.m.

 

 

EXHIBIT SUMMARY

 

A – HB 2049, Letter from John Kaempf, 1/28/03, 5 pp

B – HB 2053, Written testimony, Jim Markee, 2 pp

C – HB 2053, Advance Sheets and claim form, Bradd Swank, 9 pp

D – HB 2087, Written testimony, Judge Karston Rasmussen, 1 p

E – HB 2270, Written testimony, Bernie Vail, 1 p