May 18, 2012

You are here: Home / Archives for trust & estate law

State Judicial Revises Probate, Adoption, and Small Claims Forms and Instructions

May 4, 2012 By 1 Comment

The Colorado State Judicial Branch has issued several revised forms and instructions over the past month. Updates were made in the areas of adoption, probate, and small claims, as well as filing fees. Practitioners should begin using the new forms immediately.

Most forms are available in Adobe Acrobat (PDF) and Microsoft Word formats; many are also available as Word and Excel templates. Download the new forms from State Judicial’s individual forms pages, or below.

Adoption

  • JDF 498 – “Instructions for Kinship Adoption” (revised 4/12)

Filing Fees

  • Guide – “Guide for Determination of Indigency” (revised 4/12)

Probate

  • JDF 906 – “Instructions for Probate With a Will” (revised 4/12)
  • JDF 907 – “Instructions for Probate Without a Will” (revised 4/12)
  • JDF 805 – “Acceptance of Office – Guardianships and Conservatorships” (revised 4/12)

Small Claims

  • JDF 252a – “Motion and Order for Interrogatories – Short Form” (revised 4/12)
  • JDF 252b – “Motion and Order for Interrogatories – Long Form” (revised 4/12)
Filed Under: Resources Tagged With: , , , , , , ,

It’s Elder Law Month: Do You Have a Plan for Your Own Disability or Unexpected Events?

May 2, 2012 By Leave a Comment

May 1 is law day, we all know that, but did you also know that it’s Elder Law Day? Well, technically, May is Elder Law Month. What does that mean for attorneys? Well, for many of us that means taking a look in the mirror! You might have noticed that the average age of attorneys in Colorado is getting a bit older. From what I could dig up, somewhere around 36% of CBA members (April 2011 CBA demographics, supplied by Heather Clark via Reba Nance) are over the age of 55. Based on another statistic (let’s call it anecdotal evidence), I’m pretty sure most of them aren’t reading this post . . . !

For solo and small firm attorneys in particular, the “age thing” has important consequences for our law practices. But the bigger issues for solo and small firm attorneys have not so much to do with age as with planning. I won’t beat around the bush here – I’m talking about disability, destruction, and death. Yep, it’s why my policy is always to eat dessert first! But seriously, as the number of solo attorneys grows and many of us (yours truly included) are eligible for AARP membership, are we making the necessary plans to protect our loved ones, our law practices, and our clients? The ABA’s Law Practice Today has a good article about this, even if it is a couple years old.

If you are like the majority of my trusts & estates colleagues (I informally “interviewed” about a dozen lawyers a couple years ago), you don’t have anything in place. A couple years back I participated in a CLE program called “Planning Ahead” and we prepared some forms as part of the CLE. I think the occasion of Elder Law month is an excellent time to revisit some of the themes in that CLE. Where do we start? At the beginning!

Start with two basic questions. Ask yourself:

  • What would happen if ________?
  • What will happen when _________?

Do you have an idea of the answers? Many of us don’t! So what is the next step? Forms of course! These forms are designed to get the process started and are meant only as guidelines to help you get some strategy or plan in place with documentation to support it.

How do you get started?

How about the 15-Minute Fix? Okay, it will take longer than that – but at least the forms could be easy. Here are a few suggestions to get you started:

  1. Checklist for An Assisting Lawyer to Protect the Interests of  an Affected Attorney’s Clients (read office/file management policies and procedures)
  2. Checklist for Closing a Law Office
  3. Trust and Bank Account Considerations
  4. Business Access Considerations (agreement between attorneys to manage/close a practice)
  5. Limited Power of Attorney for Assisting Lawyer (you can have an escrow holder for this one)
  6. Casualty Clause for Engagement Letter (to tell your clients you’ve made arrangements)
  7. Will Provisions Relating to Law Practice (mine is three pages long)

If this exercise doesn’t get you thinking about your practice and how it factors into your life and your legacy (read: mindful law practice planning), I don’t know what will.

Need some more thoughts about what to consider in a plan? Another helpful article with a good list is here. If you need to be scared into considering this “for real,” read this cautionary tale from the April 2012 California Bar Journal.

For Colorado information, Colorado Attorney Regulation has a lengthy pdf from 2007 here, which contains several helpful checklists. Please, don’t give inventory counsel more work to do!

You want to read more about this in book form (with a CD with forms)? Go to the CBA lending library and check out “Being Prepared: A Lawyer’s Guide for Dealing with Disability or Unexpected Events” (2008:ABA).

Start planning – even a small plan – right now.

Barbara Cashman is a solo practitioner in Denver, focusing on elder law, estate law, and mediation. She also edits the SOLOinCOLO blog and contributes content for the site. She can be contacted at barb@DenverElderLaw.org.
Filed Under: Practice Management Tagged With: , , , , ,

2012 Cost of Living Adjustments to the Colorado Probate Code

April 19, 2012 By Leave a Comment

The Colorado Department of Revenue recently issued Cost of Living Adjustments (COLA) to certain figures in the Colorado Probate Code (as required by C.R.S. § 15-10-112). Trust and Estate practitioners should be aware of the new figures. See the form below for more information.

2012 Cost of Living Adjustments (COLA) from Colo. Dept. of Revenue

Filed Under: Updates Tagged With: ,

Colorado State Judicial Revises Many JDF Instructions and Forms in March

April 11, 2012 By Leave a Comment

As part of its continuing efforts to keep JDF forms up-to-date, the Colorado State Judicial Branch revised several instructions and a few forms in March. Practitioners should begin using the new forms and instructions immediately.

All forms are available in Adobe Acrobat (PDF) and Microsoft Word formats. Download the new forms from State Judicial’s individual forms pages or below.

Adoption

  • JDF 495 – “Instructions for Second Parent Adoption” (revised 3/12)
  • JDF 497 – “Instructions for Validation of Foreign Adoption” (revised 3/12)
  • JDF 498 – “Instructions for Kinship Adoption” (revised 3/12)
  • JDF 499 – “Instructions for Custodial Adoption” (revised 3/12)
  • JDF 500 – “Instructions for Stepparent Adoption” (revised 3/12)
  • JDF 506 – “Notice of Adoption Proceeding and Summons to Respond” (revised 3/12)

Appeals

  • JDF 126 – “Instructions to File a County Court Civil or Small Claims Appeal” (revised 3/12)

County Civil / District Civil

  • JDF 86  – “Instructions for Issuing a Subpoena in Support of an Action Outside the State of Colorado” (revised 3/12)
  • JDF 96 – “Instructions for Filing an Answer and/or Counterclaim in County Court” (Money Demand) (revised 3/12)
  • JDF 100 – “Instructions for Forcible Entry and Detainer (FED) / Evictions” (revised 3/12)
  • JDF 110 – “Instructions for County Court Civil Cases (Money Demand)” (revised 3/12)
  • JDF 112 – “Instructions for Reviving a Judgment” (revised 3/12)
  • JDF 115 – “Instructions for Replevin” (revised 3/12)
  • JDF 122 – “Instructions for Issuance of Contempt Citation” (revised 3/12)
  • JDF 137 – “Instructions for Filing a Foreign Judgment” (revised 3/12)
  • JDF 385  – “Instructions for Filing a Change of Name to Obtain Identity-Related Documents” (revised 3/12)
  • JDF 420 – “Instructions for Filing for a Change of Name (Minor)” (revised 3/12)
  • JDF 432 – “Instructions for Filing a Change of Name (Adult)” (revised 3/12)
  • JDF 605 – “Instructions for Appealing Property Tax Assessments with the District Court” (revised 3/12)
  • JDF 611 – “Instructions to Seal Criminal Conviction Records” (revised 3/12)
  • JDF 620 – “Instructions for Filing a Response to a Rule 120 Notice” (revised 3/12)

Criminal

  • JDF 323 – “Instructions to File a Petition to Seal Underage Alcohol Conviction” (revised 3/12)
  • JDF 385 – “Instructions for Filing a Change of Name to Obtain Identity-Related Documents” (revised 3/12)
  • JDF 416 – “Instructions to File a Petition to Seal Arrest and Criminal Records” (revised 3/12)

Domestic

  • JDF 1215 – “Evaluation of a Foreign Decree, Foreign Custody-Determination, and Foreign Support Order” (revised 3/12)
  • JDF 1220 – “Instructions to Register a Foreign Decree” (revised 3/12)
  • JDF 1800 – “Instructions/Options to Enforce Orders” (revised 3/12)
  • JDF 1801 – “Instructions for Completing an Income Assignment Based on Child Support and/or Maintenance Orders” (revised 3/12)

Juvenile

  • JDF 323 – “Instructions to File a Petition to Seal Underage Alcohol Conviction” (revised 3/12)
  • JDF 385 – “Instructions for Filing a Change of Name to Obtain Identity-Related Documents” (revised 3/12)
  • JDF 476 – “Instructions to Discontinue Sex Offender Registration for a Colorado and Non-Colorado Juvenile Adjudication or Disposition” (revised 3/12)

Paternity

  • JDF 1500  – “Instructions to Establish Paternity” (revised 3/12)
  • JDF 1502 – “Summons in Paternity” (revised 3/12)
  • JDF 1513 – “Instructions to Disclaim Paternity” (revised 3/12)
  • JDF 1515 – “Summons to Disclaim Paternity” (revised 3/12)

Probate

  • JDF 782 – “Instructions to File Petition to Accept Adult Guardianship and/or Conservatorship in Colorado From Sending State” (revised 3/12)
  • JDF 786 – “Instructions to File Petition to Transfer Adult Guardianship and/or Conservatorship From Colorado to Receiving State” (revised 3/12)
  • JDF 820 – “Instructions for Appointment of Guardian for Minor by Will or Other Signed Writing” (revised 3/12)
  • JDF 823 – “Instructions for Appointment of a Guardian – Minor” (revised 3/12)
  • JDF 840 – “Instructions for Appointment of a Guardian – Adult” (revised 3/12)
  • JDF 860 – “Instructions for Appointment of a Conservator – Minor” (revised 3/12)
  • JDF 875 – “Instructions for Appointment of a Conservator – Adult” (revised 3/12)
  • JDF 887 – “Instructions to File a Petition to Terminate Conservatorship” (revised 3/12)
  • JDF 906 – “Instructions for Probate With a Will” (revised 3/12)
  • JDF 907 – “Instructions for Probate Without a Will” (revised 3/12)
  • JDF 957 – “Instructions for Closing an Estate Formally” (revised 3/12)
  • JDF 958 – “Instructions for Closing a Small Estate Informally” (revised 3/12)
  • JDF 959 – “Instructions for Closing an Estate Informally” (revised 3/12)
  • JDF 989 – “Instructions for Re-Opening an Estate” (revised 3/12)

Protection Orders

  • JDF 395 – “Instructions for Restrained Person – Motion to Modify/Dismiss Protection Order” (revised 3/12)
  • JDF 400 – “Instructions for Obtaining a Civil Protection Order” (revised 3/12)

Small Claims

  • JDF 248 – “Instructions for Filing a Small Claims Case” (revised 3/12)
Filed Under: Resources Tagged With: , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

HB 12-1254: Change in Allocation of Conservation Trust Fund Moneys for Metropolitan District Parks and Recreation Services in Unincorporated Counties

March 23, 2012 By Leave a Comment

On February 7, 2012, Rep. Keith Swerdfeger and Sen. Angela Giron introduced HB 12-1254 – Concerning the Reallocation of the Conservation Trust Fund to a Metropolitan District that Provides Parks and Recreation Services Within the Unincorporated Area of a County Only. This summary is published here courtesy of the Colorado Bar Association’s e-Legislative Report.

The bill changes the reallocation of conservation trust fund moneys to a metropolitan district that provides parks and recreation services exclusively within the unincorporated area of a county from one-half of the percentage to the full percentage which the district’s population within the county is to the total population of the unincorporated area of the county. A metropolitan district may opt-out of the increased reallocation. On March 16, the Appropriations Committee amended the bill and moved it to the House floor for consideration on 2nd Reading.

Since this summary, the bill was laid over daily for Second Reading on March 20.

Summaries of other featured bills can be found here.

Filed Under: Legislation Tagged With: , ,

e-Legislative Report: Week Nine, March 12, 2012

March 13, 2012 By Leave a Comment

In this week’s Legislative Video Update, Michael Valdez discusses discusses SB 12-102, which would repeal the crime of libel, as well as an overview of the week at the Capitol, which includes pre-trial detention of minors, legal separation procedures, judicial oversight of guardians and conservators, and more.

CBA Legislative Policy Committee

The LPC met on Friday, March 9, and considered a light docket of bills:

SB 12-102 – Repeal the Crime of Libel
The LPC followed the recommendation of the Civil Rights Committee and voted to support SB 12-102 – Repeal the Crime of Libel. The LPC had delayed action on the bill to allow the Civil Rights Committee and staff to research and report additional information to the LPC. The research turned up several facts: the statute is rarely used by prosecutors, DAs and the AG had no objection to the elimination of the crime of libel, and remedies still exist for harassment and in the civil arena.

At the Capitol – Week Eight – Quick Roundup:

On Monday, March 5

  • HB 12-1139 – Pretrial Detention Of Children Tried As Adults passed on 3rd reading 34-0 with one excused in the Senate.
  • HB 12-1074 – Judicial Oversight of Guardians & Conservators passed on the 2nd Reading Consent calendar in the Senate.
  • The Senate Judiciary Committee approved CBA sponsored HB 12-1233 – Legal Separation Court Appearance Procedure. Later in the week the Senate passed the bill on 2nd Reading (Thursday) and 3rd Reading (Friday.) Since the bill was approved on 3rd Reading without amendment the next stop is the governor’s desk for signature. Congrats to the Family Law Section!

On Tuesday, March 6

  • Both Houses had early dismissal to allow Democrats to get to their caucuses; each House spent about 30 minutes on the floor.
  • Before knocking off for the day, the Senate adopted on 3rd and final reading HB 12-1074 – Judicial Oversight of Guardians & Conservators. The bill moved back to the House for consideration of the amendment added to the bill in Senate Judiciary.

On Wednesday, March 7

  • On a 35-0 vote, the Senate approved HB 12-1005 – Concerning investment of public funds.
  • The Senate Judiciary Committee approved a “strike below” version, i.e. an entirely new bill, of SB 12-070 – Uniform Residential Landlord & Tenant Act.

On Thursday, March 8

  • The House and Senate celebrated March 8, 2012 as “National Agricultural Day” with HJR 12-1015 – Concerning recognition of March 8, 2012 as “National Agricultural Day.” The resolution was adopted unanimously by the House and Senate after Representatives testified to the importance of agriculture to Colorado.
  • The House Judiciary Committee heard nearly four-and-a-half hours of testimony before amending and approving (9-2 vote), HB 12-1271 – Juvenile Direct File Limitations. The amended bill moves to the Appropriations Committee for consideration of the fiscal impact on the state.

On Friday, March 9

  • On 3rd Reading, the House unanimously adopted HB 12-1304 – Concerning measures to prevent organized retail theft. Also adopted on 3rd Reading but by a closer vote (45-20), HB 12-1175 – Concerning the encouragement of a state agency to pursue Colorado-specific solutions in lieu of federal regulation whenever possible, and, in connection therewith, requiring a state agency to report annually regarding opportunities for waiver from newly adopted federal regulations.
  • Not wasting any time after having received the Senate version of HB 12-1074 – Judicial Oversight of Guardians & Conservators, the House concurred with the Senate amendments to the bill. This ends the legislative journey for the bill – the bill moves to the governor’s desk for signature next.
Filed Under: Legislation Tagged With: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

e-Legislative Report: Week Seven, February 27, 2012

February 28, 2012 By Leave a Comment

The latest Legislative Video Update with Michael Valdez summarizes the Colorado Bar Association’s position on several bills, including Civil Unions, a bill concerning the Dissolution of Marraige, and Electronic Death Certificates.

 

CBA Legislative Policy Committee

The LPC did not meet on Friday, February 24. However, positions taken by the committee met on February 17 were omitted from last week’s newsletter due to this writer being out on sick-leave so this is an opportune time to catch you up on LPC positions taken. One position was taken on Wednesday, February 15.

SB 12-002 – Civil Unions
The LPC voted by conference call on Wednesday, February 15 to support SB 2 – Concerning Civil Unions. The Wednesday meeting was called because the bill suddenly appeared on the Judiciary Committee calendar late on Monday afternoon. The Civil Rights Committee had asked the LPC to take a formal “no position” on the bill; several sections countered with requests to the LPC to support the bill – with some needed technical corrections amendments. The sections supporting the bill were: Family, Juvenile, Elder, and Business (the Trust and Estate Section has since voted to support the bill). The LPC voted to support the bill but asked the sections to suggest and develop amendments to improve the bill. In a by-the-way note, this position is consistent with the position taken by the CBA Board of Governors in 2006 when the Board voted to support Referendum I – Domestic Partnerships. The bill passed the Judiciary and Finance Committees on February 15 and 16 respectively; the bill sits in the Appropriations Committee waiting to be calendared.

HB 12-1262 – Concerning Updates to UCC Article 9 “Secured Transactions”
At the request of the Business Law Section, the LPC voted to support HB 1262 – Updates to UCC Article 9. The bill contains needed updates to the 2001 statute that was adopted in Colorado. The ad hoc committee of the Business Law Section spent the last 24-months working through the amendments suggested by the National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Legislation (NCCUSL). The CBA testified in support of the bill on Thursday, February 23 and the bill passed out of the Judiciary Committee, unamended, on a 10-0 vote, with one excused. The next stop for the bill is the floor of the House on 2nd Reading.

HB 12-1256 – Formula for Maintenance in a Dissolution of Marriage Action
The Family Law Section was granted permission to oppose the legislation at the Capitol but the LPC also allowed the section to approach the sponsor to request the bill be pulled from consideration in this session and that a Task Force work over the summer to try to find a bill that all can agree upon. The sponsor, Rep. Beth McCann, agreed to table for 2012 and to the establishment of a Task Force on the issue that will be spearheaded by the CBA Family Law Section.

HB 12-1041 – Electronic Death Certificates
The Trust and Estate Section asked for permission to support HB 1041 – Concerning Electronic Death Certificates. The bill creates an electronic death registration system to allow persons who report death information to the Office of the State Registrar of Vital Statistics to do so electronically. The bill contemplates an alternative to the current paper based system that relies on the hand delivery of death certificates to required locations. We do not see a direct positive to practitioners but it should help their clients who sometimes have to wait for the paper filings to make their way through the hand delivery process. The bill is headed to the House floor after surviving the Appropriations Committee on Friday, February 24.

Filed Under: Legislation Tagged With: , , , , , , , , ,

Colorado Court of Appeals: Statute of Limitations Was Extended by Partial Payment Doctrine; Defense of Laches Not Applicable to Bar Claim to Recover on Promissory Note

February 21, 2012 By Leave a Comment

The Colorado Court of Appeals issued its opinion in Vessels v. Hickerson on February 16, 2012.

Promissory Note—Partial Payment Doctrine—Laches—Statute of Limitations.

In this action brought to recover on a promissory note, plaintiff Thomas J. Vessels, acting as personal representative of the estate of his deceased mother, Mary Walsh Vessels, appealed the trial court’s judgment in favor of defendant Alva J. Hickerson. The judgment was reversed and the case was remanded.

In a promissory note dated April 13, 1989, Hickerson promised to pay plaintiff’s father’s company, Vessels Oil & Gas Company (VOGC), $386,063 to settle an outstanding debt. By its terms, the note was due in full in ten years, on April 12, 1999, and was to be paid in monthly installments of $5,103.75. The note was secured by Hickerson’s royalty interest in an oil and gas lease located in Louisiana. Under the terms of the note, Hickerson agreed to make payments to VOGC from “cash or other proceeds” generated by his royalty interest in the Louisiana oil and gas lease, and Hickerson assigned his royalty interest to VOGC. Thereafter, the operators of the Louisiana oil and gas well made payments on the note directly to VOGC, bypassing Hickerson entirely. Between 1989 and 2009, the well operators, on behalf of Hickerson, made partial payments on the note; however, these payments often were insufficient to cover the amount due under the note’s monthly installment plan.

Eventually, VOGC assigned the note, and the estate of the deceased note holder (Vessels) sued Hickerson for the remaining amount due on the note. Although the trial court found that the lawsuit was timely filed pursuant to the statute of limitations, the court dismissed with prejudice all of Vessels’s claims and entered judgment in favor of Hickerson based on laches.

On appeal, Vessels contended that the trial court erred, as a matter of law, in ruling that laches is available as a defense to his legal claim under the note filed within the statutory limitations period. Under the partial payment doctrine, every time a debtor makes a partial payment, the debtor is acknowledging the existence of the debt for which the law implies a new promise to pay, thus starting the limitations period anew. Here, the fact that Hickerson did not personally make the payments on the note was immaterial, because he had authorized the well operators to make payments on his behalf. Therefore, the well operators’ partial payments were sufficient to invoke the partial payment doctrine. Because the applicable statute of limitations was extended by the partial payment doctrine, not by equitable tolling principles, and the claim was filed within the period of the applicable statute of limitations, the trial court erred in ruling that the equitable defense of laches was applicable to bar Vessels’s claim to recover on a promissory note. The judgment was reversed and the case was remanded for entry of judgment in favor of Vessels and for a determination of Vessels’s reasonable attorney fees as allowed under the terms of the promissory note.

This summary is published here courtesy of The Colorado Lawyer. Other summaries for the Colorado Court of Appeals on February 16, 2012, can be found here.

Filed Under: Case Law Tagged With: , , ,

SB 12-066: Expanding Eligibility for Guardianship Assistance

February 17, 2012 By Leave a Comment

On January 13, 2012, Sen. Jeanne Nicholson and Rep. Bob Gardner introduced SB 12-066 – Concerning Expanding Those Persons Eligible As Guardians in the Guardianship Assistance Program to Include Persons Ascribed By the Family As Having a Family-Like Relationship with the Child. This summary is published here courtesy of the Colorado Bar Association’s e-Legislative Report.

Persons ascribed by a family as having a family-like relationship with the child or who have had a prior significant relationship with the child are added to the type of individuals eligible to participate in the guardianship assistance program. On February 8, the Senate passed the bill on 3rd Reading. The bill awaits its committee of reference assignment in the House.

Since this summary, the bill was assigned to the House Judiciary Committee.

Summaries of other featured bills can be found here.

Filed Under: Legislation Tagged With: , , , , ,

SB 12-060: Improving Reporting and Recovery for Medicaid Fraud

February 17, 2012 By Leave a Comment

On January 13, 2012, Sen. Ellen Roberts introduced SB 12-060 – Concerning Improving Medicaid Fraud Prosecution. This summary is published here courtesy of the Colorado Bar Association’s e-Legislative Report.

The bill requires the department of health care policy and financing (HCPF) to submit a written report annually to the health and environment and judiciary committees of the House of Representatives and to the health and human services and judiciary committees of the senate concerning client fraud in the medical assistance program. In addition, the attorney general’s office is required to submit a written report annually concerning provider fraud.

The bill also changes the amount of a county’s share of recoveries of fraudulently obtained medical assistance when the recovery is initiated by a county department, county board, district attorney, or HCPF on behalf of the county. Instead of sharing one-half of the state funds paid with the state, the county may retain the full amount of the recovery after payment of the federal government’s share. On February 2, the Health and Human Services Committee referred an amended version of the bill to the Appropriations Committee for consideration of the fiscal impact.

Summaries of other featured bills can be found here.

Filed Under: Legislation Tagged With: , , , , , , , ,

SB 12-052: Increasing the Business Personal Property Tax Exemption

February 17, 2012 By Leave a Comment

On January 13, 2012, Sen. Mark Scheffel and Rep. Kevin Priola introduced SB 12-052 – Concerning a Property Tax Exemption for Business Personal Property. This summary is published here courtesy of the Colorado Bar Association’s e-Legislative Report.

Under current law, the amount of the exemption from property tax for business personal property listed on a single personal property schedule is $5,500 for the current property tax year cycle, $7,000 for the next property tax year cycle, and an inflation-adjusted amount for each property tax year cycle thereafter. The bill increases the business personal property exemption to $14,000 for the next property tax year cycle, which in turn increases the future inflation-adjusted amount of the exemption.

For a period of 10 years, the bill also exempts a portion of the business personal property of a state-assessed public utility through the creation of a valuation cap. The valuation cap is based on the actual value of the public utility’s operating property and plant for the 2011 property tax year, or a later property tax year in the case of a new public utility, with an incremental increase each year thereafter during the 10-year period. The value of property above the cap is deemed attributable to business personal property, unless the property tax administrator determines otherwise. The bill is assigned to the Finance Committee; the bill is scheduled for committee review on Thursday, February 16 Upon Adjournment (generally, sometime between 9:30 a.m. and 12:00 p.m.

Since this summary, the bill was postponed indefinitely by the Senate Finance Committee.

Summaries of other featured bills can be found here.

Filed Under: Legislation Tagged With: , , , , ,

e-Legislative Report: Week Five, February 13, 2012

February 15, 2012 By Leave a Comment

At the Capitol – Week Five

The latest Legislative Video Update with Michael Valdez outlines the most straight-forward bill the CBA has ever sponsored.

HB 12-1233 – Concerning the ability of a court to enter a decree of legal separation in certain circumstances without the appearance of the parties.

Sponsored by Rep. Jeanne Labuda and Sen. Morgan Carroll, the Family Law Section of the CBA brings you a bill where the title of the bill is pretty much the bill.

In a dissolution of marriage action, if there are no children of the marriage and the parties have entered into a written agreement concerning the division of marital property, a court may enter a degree of dissolution by affidavit, without the appearance of the parties. The bill aligns the process for parties seeking a legal separation by permitting a court to enter a decree of legal separation, under the same conditions, without the appearance of the parties.

The bill is scheduled for review by the Judiciary Committee on Tuesday, February 14 at 1:30 p.m.

Bar Sponsored bill moves forward

The Senate Judiciary Committee approved SB 12-131 in a short committee hearing on Wednesday, February 8. CBA sponsored, SB 12-131 – Duty Search for Designated Beneficiary Agreements, clarifies a PR or a trustee’s liability when conducting a search for a valid, unrevoked Designated Beneficiary Agreement (“DBA). The bill moves to the Senate floor for consideration on 2nd Reading.

Bar supported legislation passes initial hurdle

HB 12-1074 – Judicial Oversight of Guardians and Conservators. On Thursday, February 9, the Judiciary Committee unanimously approved the bill. This will authorize the court with jurisdiction over a guardianship of an incapacitated person or over a conservatorship of a protected person to have access to data maintained by other state agencies in order to conduct an investigation when a guardian or conservator has failed to file required reports with the court, or has failed to respond to court orders. The Elder Law Section worked out amendments with the Judicial Branch to clarify the extent of the search that a court undertakes to find a missing guardian or conservator. The bill moves to the floor of the House for action on 2nd Reading.

CBA Legislative Policy Committee

For followers who are new to CBA legislative activity, the Legislative Policy Committee (LPC) is the CBA’s legislative policy making arm during the legislative session. The LPC meets weekly during the legislative session to determine CBA positions from requests from the various sections and committees of the Bar Association.

Friday, February 10 – “Juvenile Law Day” at the LPC

The Juvenile Law Section requested positions on several pieces of legislation.

HB 12-1139 – Pretrial Detention of Children Tried as Adults

The Juvenile Law Section requested and received authorization from the LPC to support HB 12-1139. The bill changes the process for place of pre-trial confinement for a juvenile who may be charged as an adult. The bill puts the decision for confinement back with the judge instead of the current process of allowing the prosecuting attorney and the defense counsel reach a stipulation. The bill is scheduled for consideration by the Judiciary Committee on Thursday, February 16 at 1:30 p.m.

SB 12-033 – Child Fatality Reviews

The Juvenile Law Section sought permission to support SB 12-033 – Child Fatality Reviews. The bill adds near fatalities and incidents of egregious abuse or neglect to the responsibilities of the department of human services child fatality review team. The LPC voted unanimously to support the request of the Juvenile Law Section and to support the bill.

SB 12-099 – Expand Access to Academic Model Juvenile Facility

The Juvenile Law Section has concerns with the direction that SB 12-099 – Expand Access to Academic Model Juvenile Facility. The Juvenile Law Section stated several concerns with this bill draft:

  • Mixing correctional and child welfare systems flies in the face of best practices;
  • The facility that is the subject to the legislation – Ridge View Youth Services Center – does not provide the treatment services for the foster care protection.

The LPC voted to oppose the legislation.

SB 12-056 – Court Appointments Domestic Relations Cases

The Juvenile Law Section teamed up with the Family Law Section to request CBA opposition to SB 12-056 – Court Appointments Domestic Relations Cases. The bill is being held on the Senate 2nd Reading calendar to give the Family and Juvenile Law Sections time to find a compromise. The primary objection to the latest iteration of the bill is the shift from making the order to conduct a Parental Rights Evaluation (“PRE”) an absolute right to a discretionary decision by the district court. The LPC agreed with the request from the Juvenile Law Section and voted to oppose the bill.

Filed Under: Legislation Tagged With: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
« Older Posts