montana state senate room 325 of the state capitol by …
TRANSCRIPT
MONTANA STATE SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE
MINUTES OF THE MEETING
March 19, 1987
The forty-sixth meeting of the Senate Judiciary Committee was called to order on March 19, 1987 at 10:00 a.m. in Room 325 of the state Capitol by t~e chairman,~Senator Joe Mazurek.
ROLL CALL: All committee members were present.
CONSIDERATION OF HOUSE BILL 790: Representative. Dennis Rehberg, Billings District 88, introduced HB 790, which amends the law relating to payment of attorney fees and costs in lawsuits. (Exhibit 1) He presented the . committee with statistics on states' ballot/policy issues. (Exhibit 2)
PROPONENTS: Riley Johnson, NFIB, supported the bill.
Kay Foster, Billings Chamber of Commerce, supported the bill.
Stuart Doggett, Chamber of Commerce, testified in favor of the bill.
John Maynard, Tort Claims Dept., explained all sections of the bill. (see exhibit 1)
OPPONENTS: Tim Baker, PSC, stated he was just a technical witness for the bill. He said there will be a fiscal impact with this bill.
Frank Crowley, Montana Department of Health, stated his department has only 4 attorneys, so this department does a lot of action. He said his department is 90% federally funded. He expressed he would like to see the sunset provision be set back to the way it was.
George Ochenski, Montana Environmental Information Center opposed the bill. He said Karl Englund told him this was a good bill for lawyers. He explained that when the Department of Health needs a lawyer, the state pays for it,
Judiciary Committee March 19, 1987 Page 2
so if a lawyer wins the case, they get their cut from the defendant, and on top of that, they get a cut from the state. Mr. Ochenski thought it cost the state too much.
DISCUSSION ON HOUSE BILL 790: Senator Mazurek asked if other states pay for attorney fees out of the selfinsurance pool. Rep. Rehberg said they do.
Senator Crippen asked if this bill is for non-profit and profit organizations both. Mr. Ochenskisaid it is for both, in his eyes.
Senator Blaylock called the bill legal socialism.
George Ochenski said his group should have equal legal help to go up against big corporations that are against environmentalists.
Rep. Rehberg responded to Mr. Ochenski's comment on how he felt his non-profit group was entitled to this bill. Rep. Rehberg said he limited his bill to small business so he would not have to deal with non-profit people.
Mr. Johnson stated many times small businesses don't know where to turn to when it comes to paying attorney fees.
Mr. Baker clarified that under the federal law, nonprofit groups are included under a similar statute.
Rep. Rehberg closed the hearing on HB 790.
ACTION ON HOUSE BILL 78: Noel Larmie and John McGray gave the committee amendments to the bill and said they support table guidelines on chil:d support. (Exhibit 3)
Senator Halligan asked how this can comply with federal when it takes away so much of a person's lump sum pay. Ms. Lane was not sure how the bill· worked into the federal.
Senator Mazurek said the bill will not prevent the parent living with the child from using the child support lump sum on other things.
Senator Beck asked how one calculates the lump sum payments if the supporting parent is currently up to date with payments. Ms. Lane quite sure.
Senator Halligan moved the amendments.
Judiciary Committee March 19, 1987 Page 3
Senator Brown distributed a letter from James Bartlett, an attorney in Kalispell, which stated the bill will allow mothers who are not on welfare to intercept these lump sum payments. (Exhibit 4)
Senator Mazurek did not agree with the idea that all mothers could be under this bill.
Senator Halligan added to his motion, all departments can use this bill, and not just the Dept. of Revenue. The motion carried.
Senator Halligan moved House Bill 78 BE CONCURRED IN AS AMENDED. The motion carried. ~
ACTION ON HOUSE BILL 495: Written testimony was given to the committee by Linda McNiel and Mike Salvagni. (Exhibit 5) The committee waited on action on HB 495.
ACTION ON HOUSE BILL 679: Valencia Lane explained that· HB 740, if passed, would make this bill's percentage of 50% of the funding going to abuse programs, change to 1%. She distributed amendments to the bill. (Exhibit 6) Senator Beck moved the amendments. The motion carried. Senator Beck moved HB 679 BE CONCURRED IN AS AMENDED. The motion carried.
ACTION ON HOUSE BILL 283: John McGray distributed amendments to HB 283. (Exhibit 7) Senator Mazurek wanted to clarify that the bill still makes a parent notify the other if he/she is moving a child's residency to another state, and the parent that receives the notice must give written consent. Senator Mazurek said the bill does say it is for joint custody cases and non-joint custody cases.
Senator Bishop wanted to know where the 30 day notice provision was. Senator Mazurek asked what happens to a parent who doesn't give a 30 day notice.
Senator Beck wanted to wait for action on HB 283 and 284. The committee will wait on action.
ACTION ON HOUSE BILL 344: Chat Smith gave written testimony to the committee. (Exhibit 8)
Judiciary Committee March 19, 1987 Page 4
Senator Mazurek explained how if the committee supports one side of this issue, the committee loses several groups on the other side, and visa versa. Senator Mazurek thought the Neely amendments were too narrow.
Ms. Lane said if the bill is passed, it will limit the time period to bring a suit by a substantial amount. She said if damage occurred at 4 years of age, by the time the 4 year old has grown to know that he has cause to sue, the statute of limitations has run out. Senator Maxurek stated the law says a parent can't bring a suit against the hospital on behalf of the child.
Senator Halligan moved on page 2, line 12, the statute of limitation provision include that a child's statute of limitation can start when the child turns 8 years of age. (See Standing Committee Report, amendments 2 and 3) The motion carried.
Senator Brown moved to have the bill be retroactive. The motion carried.
Senator Brown moved HB 344 BE CONCURRED IN AS AMENDED. The motion carried with Senator Halligan voting no.
ADJOURNMENT: The meeting adjourned at 12:10 p.m.
[JI\'l'L I ;.,
1 r '\.' ON .' I '/,; j r'i / 1'l1 / I COM..'" T' E.:.. ______ . .;..;(/;;..;J .• j...,;.J.;;.:~~I.:..: •. , ........... \ .:...(....i..·'7.fff_~ ____ -----------
VISITOH9' IO':CISTER • -----_._--_._-- - .--. _. _.--_ •.. - -----------....----:::-:----:------
•
..
• - ----------------------+-------------------------+-----~----_4------
-----------------------~-----------------------~----~-----~------
• -------------------+---------.-----------------~-----~--------~------
• ------.------------. .--.--,----------------+-----t---,---~---
--.------------------.--.---------------------.-t-.----+-----+----• --------------.--------b-----.-------------------~---~------~----
.-----------------.--------+---------------------+------~------~------
---.--------------------+----------------------+-----~----_4----
r --------------------+----------------------t-----+-----..J------
---------------------+----------------.--------~---~-----~-----
WI ....;:B!~------------.t__.------ ____________ -+-____ +-____ ~----
----_.--------_.- ._-_._------_. __ .•. _------'-------'------'----(Plc..lSC leilvP (Jr<'(J<.lrl·d st<ltcment with Sccretary)
NAME: __ lI/'JIj 8jtrt... _____ DATE: 3/i9/EJ-' ADDRf:SS :·.-:::J:-7w~:::...J/~14.l.-!....::o:...::5~p.::....:C:;::....:_ {::;...;;'}'""_·--=Jty.~:.....;:..i-'-f/_·_M_(z_-,0_. ·_it ______ _
PHONE: _4..!-tfl-L/L-../'--.L.:::b:..:.../7..!.-U.Z--------------__ _
REPRESENTING WHOM?_..L..P-=5::....:k-=:::;...----=--~---------____ _
AP PEAR! NG ON WH I CH PROPOSAL: _-'f..J.:{ .... B::...--~N_o~. _7:...-+2_0 ________ _
DO YOU: SUPPORT? ___ _ AMEND? ---- OPPOSE? ---
COt-t"1ENTS : __ 1t..::.[_C.....;.tI_JV_'_C.....;4...!-/-...-;.w----:.ry...:..A<'-=-5:~5'~ ____________ _
PLEASE LEAVE k~Y PREPARED STATEMENTS WITH THE CO~~ITTEE SECRETARY.
NAME: ;::XAML G?eN .. L&;-I-: ____ DATE: jd;,}?J
ADDRESS:: Be; 7 2~ y ~6. --~~~/~----~~----~~~~---------------
PH ONE: __ --'-V....;;.,<f-:...?-' -----?7"--"r;,--'-/.-..;;;(}~_+t---..;V;.......;..y......;-.y---Z-C-}-(l-> _/..,.I_rrVt_7~C ) __ _
~P~SENTING ~OM?~_L~'~)~~-~)_· ~ ___ ~~ ____ ~ ________________ ~
APPEARING ON WHICH PROPOSAL:_~I4-,--t15_7=---.,.L~()-,--_________ _
AMEND? / ~~OPPOSE? ----00 YOU: SUPPORT? ___ _
PLEASE LEAVE k~Y PREPARED STATEMENTS WITH THE CO~~ITTEE SECRETARY.
SUMMARY OF HB790 (REHBERG)
SENATE JUDICIARY EXHIBIT N
1T~~--::-_ DA /;/ /D 8fU Ncl.!I/i /7L
(Prepared by Senate Judiciary Committee staff)
HB790 amends the law relating to payment of attorney fees and costs in lawsuits. Under current law, a person cannot recover attorney fees in a lawsuit unless there is a specific, applicable statutory or contractual provision that allows such recovery. This bill would require the State to pay the attorney fees and expenses of small businesses who prevail against the State in certain court and administrative proceedings. There are currently provisions in state law that allow recovery of costs, but not including attorney fees, in certain cases.
- Section 1. NEW. Findings and purposes. Bill has two purposes: 1) to allow eligible small businesses to recover reasonable litigation expenses from the state; and 2J to promote reasonable regulatory and enforcement activities in the state. Bill states findings that 1) small businesses are deterred from defending against unreasonable state actions because of expenses of litigation; and 2) the standard for the award of attorney fees against the state should be different from the standa~d applied to a private party because of the greater legal and financial resources of the state.
- Section 2. NEW. Definitions. - "Administrative hearing" doesn't include proceedin~s
to fix a rate, involving eminent domain or condemnation, or in which the state is only a nominal party, or proceedings not involving the business regulatory function of the state (i.e., it does include proceedings involving the busi~ess regulatory function of the state);
- "Business regulatory function of the state"; - "Fees and expenses" includes: reasonable expert
witness expenses; reasonable costs of any study analysis, engineering report, test, or project; necessary discovery costs; and reasonable attorney fees;
- "Hearing officer"; - "Position of the state"; - "Prevailing" means obtaining a favorable judgment in
a judicial action or administarative hearing or reaching a favorable settlement of a judicial action or administrative hearing;
- "Small business" means a commercial or business entity, including a sole proprietorship or a partnership, with a net worth of less than $2 million and fewer than 25 employees [amended from 250 employees by the House];
- "State"; and - "Substantially justified" means reasonable in both
law and fact. - Section 3. NEW. Award of fees and expenses in court cases.
A prevailing small business is entitled to an award of reasonable fees and expenses in a) a civil action, unless court finds that
(OVER)
state's position was substantially justified; and b) upon judicial review of an administrative decision, unless the court finds that the position of the state was substantially justified (includes expenses incurred during the administrative hearing). A party can not recover duplicate fees and expenses.
- Section 4. NEW. Award of fees and expenses in administrative hearings. A prevailing small business is to be awarded reasonable fees and expenses incurred by it in an administrative hearing initiated by the state unless the hearig officer finds that the position of the state was substantially justified. A dissatisfied person can appeal to the "proper court". Attorney General's office to adopt model rule establishing procedures for award of fees and expenses. A person can not recover duplicate fees and expenses.
- Section 5. NEW. Judge or hearing officer can reduce or deny award upon finding that the small business: 1) unreasonably protracted the final resolution of the matter; or 2) refused a settlement offer by the state that was at least as favorable to the small business as the relief ultimately obtained.
- Section 6. NEW. Payments by a state agency, commission, board, or department must be paid out of its liability insurance or out of a self-insured pool maintained by it. If no insurance is available to the award, it must be paid by an appropriation made at the next regular session of the legislature. Each agency paying such an award must report to the next reuglar session of the legislature.
- Section 7. NEW. Applicability. - Section 8. NEW. Act terminates June 30, 1991 (amended
form 1989 by House).
COMMENTS: 1. All state agencies are insured (for liability) through the state's self insurance pool (the Tort Claims fund). I don't know if this kind of liability is, or would be, covered by the Tort Claims fund. If it is, each agency's premium rate would undoubtedly go up to cover this new liability. If it does not, each agency would be required to go to the legislatur for supplemental funding to cover any awards. QUESTION: Since the bill reguires payment but does not provide funding therefor, could the obligation of future legislatures to provide the funding be considered an impermissible action of this legislature binding future legislatures? (At this writing I do not know the answer to this question).
2. Please see the comments on the Fiscal Note on pages 2 and 3 under LONG-RANGE EFFECTS OF PROPOSED LEGISLATION AND TECHNICAL OR MECHANICAL DEFECTS IN PROPOSED LEGISLATION OR CONFLICTS WITH EXISTING LEGISLATION.
C:\LANE\WP\SUMHB790.
SENATE JUDICIARY
EXHIBIT~. .:; ~ , , . C; jLr,
o.n-rent Status of Equal Access Legislation in the States
OATE!l~a<~f0 17: : /IL) -JCC) BilL NO. ~'
State
Alaska
Arizona
Arkansas
California
Colorado
Connecticut
Delaware
Florida
Georgia
Hawaii
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Kansas
Kentucky
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Ballot or Pbliey Pbsition?
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Legislation Introduced (Year) and/or Pending
Legislation Enacted or Executive Order (Year)
1984
No
1981
1984 (vetoed)
N:me
1981, 1985
1981
1981
1985 ..
1981
1977, 1982, 1983
1983
1977, 1984 " 1983
1983, 1984 None
1562 1984
1983 No
1982, 1983 No
fu No
1981 1981
1981 ~ 148ft 1981, 1983 1983
1980, 1981,1982 1982
1982 1982
1981, 1982 1982
1982,1983 1983
1982, 1983 1983
1982, 1983 None
I"
Ballot or State Policy Position?
Michigan 1979
Minnesota Yes
Mississippi Yes
Missouri Yes
M:>ntana Yes
Nebraska Yes
Nevada Yes
New Hampshire Yes
New Jersey Yes
New Mexico Yes
New York Yes
North Carolina Yes
North Dakota No
Chio Yes
Cklahana Yes
Oregon Yes
Pennsylvania Yes
ROOde Island Yes
South Carolina Yes
South Dakota Yes
Tennessee Yes
Texas Yes
Utah Yes
Legislation legislation Fnacted Introduced (Year) or E'Xecuti ve and/or Pending Order (Year)
1981, 1983, 1984 1984
1981, 1983
N>
1981, 1983
N>
1982
N>
N>
1982, 1983
1981, 1982, 1983
1982, 1983
1981, 1983
1985
Pending
1982
1979, 1981
1982
Yes
Yes
Pending
1983
1981, 1983
1983
~ 14tt' No
N:me
None
1982
No
N:me
None
&me
1984 (vetoed)
1983 ,. 1985
No
1982
1981
1983
1984 (vetoed)
1984
rb
1984
None
1983
SENATE, JUDICIARY ..
EXHIBIT NO_--.::::;!-=----
DATE.. d - /9- F7
Bill No._g.8. 79()
Legislation !.egis lation Enacted
Ballot or Introduced (Year) or Executive State Policy Position? B.DJJ/ or Pending Order (Year)
VeIlJX)[lt Yes 1982 N:xte
Virginia Yes 1979, 1980, 1981 1981
Washington Yes ~ None
West Virginia Yes 1983 None
Wisconsin Yes 1981, 1982, 1983 ~ Ltt~f Wyaning Yes 1983 Vetoed 1983 ..,
00028
"
SENATE JUDICIARY FXWBiT NO,_-'rh«=-__ _
DJ,;"__ .i -/9 -8: 7
BILL No.~A.B·. 77'0
Proposed amendments to HB78, third reading copy (blue)
1. Title, line 6. Following: "COMPENSATION" Strike: "LUMP-SUM"
2. Page 1, line 17. Following: "(b)" Strike: "to defray"
SENATE JUDICIARY
EXHIBIT NO. '--~ -------DATE.. /llCldLl/7 /'3, /yE
( , , Bill NO)//3 28
Insert: "a portion of any lump-sum award or periodic payment to pay"
3. Page 2, line 1. Following: "Paymen~~" Strike: "A LUMP-SUM PAYMENT" Insert: "Payments"
4. Page 2, line 2. Following: "CHAPTER" Strike: "IS" Insert: "are"
5. Page 2, line 3. Following: "f01:1:0W~-:-"
Insert: "as follows:"
6. Page 2, lines 11 through 14. Following: "payment:" on line 11 Strike: the remainder of line 11 through "SUPPORT" on line 14 Insert: "(a) for any periodic payment, an amount up to the
percentage amount established in the guidelines promulgated in supreme court Order No. 86-223, dated January 13, 1987; or
(b) for any lump-sum award, an amount up to that portion of the award that is ~~ for the payment of current or past-due child support"
C:\LANE\WP\AMDHB78.
CD
C
r-
~
r-~
CJ ~[
't
Clq, , ... ~
~,J
HB
00
78
/02
50
th L
eg
isla
ture
H
B 0
07
8/0
2
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 ~ 9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
rTI
en
x 20
rT"1
:x
: Z
§21~
--I
!T1
:2
: 22
__
9 =
~~
24~
:::0
5-
<'
HO
USE
B
ILL
N
O.
78
INTR
OD
UC
ED
BY
J.
BROW
N
BY
REQ
UES
T O
F TH
E D
EPA
RTM
ENT
OF
REV
ENU
E
A
BIL
L
FOR
A
N
AC
T E
NT
ITL
ED
: "A
N
AC
T TO
PE
RM
IT
THE
ATT
AC
HM
ENT
OR
GA
RN
ISH
MEN
T O
F W
OR
KER
S'
CO
MPE
NSA
TIO
N t
ON
c
JO
II
BE
NE
FIT
S
FOR
TH
E PA
YM
ENT
OF
CE
RT
AIN
C
HIL
O
SUPP
OR
T
OB
LIG
AT
ION
S;
AN
D
AM
END
ING
SE
CT
ION
3
9-7
1-7
43
. M
CA
."
BE
IT
ENA
CTE
D
BY
THE
LE
GIS
LA
TU
RE
O
F TH
E ST
AT
E
OF
MO
NTA
NA
:
Secti
on
1
. S
ecti
on
3
9-7
1-7
43
. M
CA
, is
am
end
ed
to
read
:
"39
-71
-74
3.
Ass
ign
men
t o
r att
ach
men
t o
f p
ay
men
ts.
(1)
NO
pay
men
ts
un
der
th
is
ch
ap
ter
sh
all
b
e assig
nab
le.
su
bje
ct
to
att
ach
men
t o
r g
arn
ish
men
t.
or
be
held
li
ab
le
in
any
w
ay
2 3 4 5 6 7 e 9
10
11
12
13
14
15
for
deb
ts.
except~
as pr
ovid
~ ~~8~; o
~ _~ ~ ,}
\ ~
~
(b) ~~1't
mo
neta
ry Ob~ti~r
curr..E'.l)~~!'~
17
~t-due
ch ild
sU
PP
Er t.
. s
ub
ject
to
the __
l.im
i ~a t
i~!~s..
~i,!
'J-18
19
su
bsecti
on
12
).
wh
en
ev
er:
2
0
(i)
th
e
sup
po
rt obl19~~ion
is establ~she<LJ:>y'_ord~_<:J.K.
'23 24
Po.-~~~
. i~LP~nt!'l
.,
!>Im
p
SUlI
P'V
IHit
I'P
nund
er
this
seeti
on
-llr
e
CH
APT
ER ~-subject
to
ass
ign
men
t.
att
ach
men
t.
or
garn
ish
men
t ._
" fo
r ch
ild
~~! I
Is-f
oli
ow
s.-
(1..
.0 ~:
~l--The-compenslltion--reeipient:--is--entit:ied--t:o--the
firs
t: -S
}}
e -
.of-
eYer
y-w
eek
:l:y
-pll
ym
enb
·
tbt--The--Tit:ie--IV-e--1Igeney--~nder-the-federlli-90eiai
Sectl~i!r:Act:-i9-ent:it:}ed-t:o-the--~emai~de~--o£--elleh--weekiy
~~~t:-~-t:o-lI-mll~imnm-of-5e'-of-t:he-t:ot:lli-pllyment~
~t--The--Tit::l:e--IV-e--1Igeney--tlnder-t:he-federll:l:-Soeiai
Se~rit:r:Aet:-is-ent:it:ied-to-lI-maximtlm-of-5e'-of-lIny-:l:tlmp-snm
gett:l:e~.nt:-paIment:
BY
'fil
e
'fIT
be
1'i
B
AaE
l4C
I tJ
lmE
R
litE
f'IJ
OE
fh .. b
G
OC
IM.
GS
CU
RI'
P'f
"'
C'P
H
I 'f
1l8
...
. IS~IIT
Til
"'!'
P
"ftT
O
f ...
bu
/'P
S
811
U;-
SP
SC
H'I
C ...
r,b
'f
GR
....
I'fE
B
FO
R
'f1
l8
p"'
IlIe
ll'f
S
f'
f','
S'f
"t
il!:
un
der
Act
for
Aft
er
dete
rmin
ati
on
th
at
the
cla
im
is
co
vere
d
Co
mp
ensa
tio
n
Act
o
r O
ccu
pati
on
al
Dis
ease
liab
ilit
y
for
pay
men
t o
f th
e
cla
im
is
of
the ap
pro
pri
ate
w
ork
ers
' co
mp
en
sati
on
fee
or
ch
arg
e sh
all
b
e p
ay
ab
le
by
th
e
inju
red
treatm
en
t o
f in
juri
es
su
sta
ined
if
li
ab
ilit
y
is
by
the
insu
rer.
"
m:w
~E
:C:r
19!l
-,-
Secti
on
2
. E
xte
nsi
on
o
f au
tho
rity
. A
ny
ex
isti
ng
au
tho
rity
o
f th
e
dep
art
men
t o
f re
ven
ue
or
the
dep
art
men
t o
f la
bo
r to
m
ake
rule
s
on
th
e
su
bje
ct
of
the
a co
urt
o
f co
mp
ete
nt ~isdiction.~~_<2E.<:I!r re
nd_e
red_
.~_a
ll
ad
min
istr
ati
ve p
rocess
au
tho
rized
bi'...~~~_~
law
; an
.<:l.
!l.!..L~_orde!~_being . .
..E'
.!'_~Q
~e..
'!.J
lY
the de
pa~I
l1~-
".!.
of
!.i'
~.en
ue
or
oth
er
publ
i~~.
!'~L
.£,:
!rsu
at~~
_!:.
.~_
Tit
le !_~.Q..9!.. .
.t:h
~ 25
p
rov
isio
ns
of
this
act
is
ex
ten
ded
to
th
e
pro
vis
ion
s o
f th
is
(a)-
for
an
y
peri
od
iC
pay
men
t,
an
am
ou
nt
up
to
th
e
[eder~~~cia!
Secu
r it~
~n. "."
,."
•• c
o",
)
perc
en
tag
e
amo
un
t esta
bli
sh
ed
in
th
e
gu
ideli
nes
pro
mu
lgate
in
su
pre
me
co
urt
O
rder
No.
8
6-2
23
, d
ate
d
Jan
uary
1
3,
19
87
i o
r an
am
ou
nt
up
to
iat p
orti
,; .
. cu
rren
t .. 1
"",
.. " .... 1
I
.. J
J I
J o
f ,t
r
'w)
for
an
y
lum
p-s
um
aw
ard
, l
~ aw
ard
th
at
is
desi
gn
ate
d
r-~".Jt -
d",
e'c
h L
.. y"".
J s u
t'I"
d t
" ..
. .. 1
f~.J th
e.a
ym
en
j J
._--
1
'\
SUPP
ORI
' G
UID
EL
UJE
S TA
BLE
$0
-, $
4,50
0-$
8,5
00
-$1
2,25
0-$1
6,50
0-$2
0,00
0-$2
8,00
0 §4
t49
9 $8
t49
9 ~249
~§d99
~~l~99
~L99~
... 39
,499
$J
9,50
0+
COO
Chi
ld
0-11
21
.8
21.8
21
.4
19.7
18
.0
17.4
16
.3
13
.6
12-1
7 27
.0
27.0
.2
6.5
24.4
22
.3
21.5
~O
.:,!
16
.8
'&0
Chi
ldre
n 0-
11
33.8
33
.8
33.2
30
.7
28.0
.
27.1
25
.3
21
.1
12-1
7 41
.8
41.8
41
.0
38.0
34
.6
33.5
31
.3
26.1
Thr
ee C
hil
dre
n
·0-1
1
42.4
42
.4
41'.5
38
.4
35.1
33
.8
31. 7
26
.5
f,2-
17
52.4
52
.4
51.3
47
.5
43.4
41
.8
39.2
32
.8
Four
:' O
1i1d
ren
b-l
1
47.7
47
.7
46.8
43
.4
39.6
38
.2
35.7
29
.8
j ,1
2-17
59
.0
59.0
57
.9
53.6
48
.9
. 47.
2 44
.1
36.9
I . ,
;,
I :
Fiv
e ,C
hild
ren
0-11
I
52.1
52
.1
51.1
47
.3
43.2
41
.6
38.9
32
.6
I
~2-17
I 64
.4
64.4
63
.1
58.4
53
.4
. 51.
4 4
8.1
4
0.3
I
. , ,
. ,
Six
Chi
Idre
n
0-11
55
.7
55.7
54
.6
50.5
'4
6.2
44
.5
41.6
34
.9
12-1
7 '6
8.9
68
.9
67.5
62
.4
57
.1
55.0
51
.4
43
.1
U.»
,.,.,
..
For
ch
ild
ren
in
dif
fere
nt
age cate~pries,
pro
-rat
e ba
Sed
()r.
to
tal
nuni
Jer
of
:z
~
chi.l
!.tr
en.
Exi
lITpl
e:
for
one
chil
d a~~
7, o
ne a
ga 1
4,
cum
ual
inea
re o
f $1
8,00
0;
,.,.,
. us
e pe
rcen
tage
s fo
r tw
o c
hil
Cre
n,
div
ided
by
tw
o -
-(2
8.0
"/ 2
) +
(34
.6 "
! 2)
=
.... c
: 31
. 3.
c
~~
:::c -< ~.
-_-B
l-__
_ f ...
......
r-
I
... .,
(
-'~-
..
·,A "');) .~ ... )£ L/ _. _ .. '... '.~ f"
CHARLES l. HASH KENNETH E. O'BRIEN JAMES C. BARTLETI
C. MARK HASH
Senator Bob Brown Montana State Senate Capitol Station Helena, MT 59620
Dear Bob:
'.-.7- A; /j 1\.[ ~ ·;:~,i/~:.:-I.
HASH, O'BRIEN & BARTLETT ATIORNEYS AT LAW
PLAZA WEST· 138 FIRST AVENUE WEST
P.O. BOX 1178
KALISPELL, MONTANA 59903·1178
406-755·6919
January 14, 1987
SENATE JUDICIARY; .-' "
EXHIBIT NO. .z: DAT~/11;;--.l----d;--''--/-{j-/i-'. BIll No.Lfl3 7&
'.
Thank you for your letter of January 6, 1987 in which you enclosed the proposed bill to allow a portion of Workers' Compensation benefits to be intercepted to pay child support. Th& bill allows the interception of benefits for child support, to a limited amount, but under subsection (b), it is in the conjunctive, which would require that the mother seek relief through the Department of Revenue or other public agency in order to intercept the payment. This usually means that the mother be on welfare. As I read the bill, this would not permit a mother who is not on welfare to intercept the payment.
I do not feel this is fair treatment of mothers who do not need to receive benefits from welfare. I would ask you to remedy this, perhaps by simply changing the bill to the disjunctive so the word "or" is substituted for the word "and" as I have circled on the bill which is enclosed herewith.
Thank you for your consideration.on this topic.
JCB:af Enclosure
Sincerely,
HASH, O'BRIEN & BARTLETT
• Bartlett
I ~Oth Legislature LC 0072/01
I
1
2
3
4
5
6
f I ii'
SENATE JUDICIARY
.,.J
I EXHIBIT NO. ~ DAT_E... _____ -'''''~ __ -:/:.9~--R~ -l...1=~1
INTRODUCED BY _____________ ....::8.='U:...::.:NO::-=====!6::,8= • .LlziL: BILL NO.
BY REQUEST OF THE DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE
A BILL FOR AN ACT E~TITLED: "AN ACT TO PERMIT Tn ... n.r.
ATTACHMENT OR GARNISHMENT OF WORKERS' COMPENSATION BENEFITS
I I
7 FOR THE PAYMENT OF CERTAIN CHILD SUPPORT OBLIGATIONS; AND I I 8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
AMENDING SECTION 39-71-743, MCA. 1t
"
BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF MONTANA: I Section 1. Section 39-71-743, MCA, is amended to read: 1
..,~ 1139-71-743. Assignment or attachment of payments. (1)
No payments under this chapter shall be assignable, subject
to attachment or garnishment, or be held liable in any way
for debts, except~
J2J.. as provided in 71-3-1118-:-~
(b) to defray a monetary obligation· for current or
past-due child support when~ver:
(i) the support obligation is established by order of
a court of competent jurisdiction or in an
administrative rocess auchorized b state law;
(ii) the order is being enforced by the department of
revenue or other public agency pursuant to Title IV-D of the
i i i i I I
federal Social Security Act. . 1
~(~c.) __ ~P~a~y~m~e~n~t~s __ ~u~n~d~e~r __ ~t~h~i~s __ ~s~e~c~t~i~o~n~~a~r~e~~s~u~b~j~e~c~t~~t~o "1
~ , :i I
.l LC 0072/01
1 assignment, attachment, or garnishment for child support as
2 follows:
3 (i) The compensation recipient is entitled to the
4 first $110 of every weekly payment.
5 (ii) The Title IV-O agency under the federal Social
6 Security Act is entitled to the remainder of each weekly
7 payment up to a maximum of 50% of the total payment.
8 (iii) The Title IV-D agency under the federal Social
9 Security Act is entitled to a maximum of 50% of any lump-sum
10 settlement payment.
11 (2) After determination that the claim is covered
12 under the Workers' Compensation Act or Occupational Disease
13 Act of Montana, the liability for payment of the claim is
14 the responsibility of the appropriate workers' compensation
15 insurer. No fee or charge shall be payable by the injured
16 worker for treatment of injuries sustained if liability is
17 accepted by the insurer."
18 NEW SECTION. Section .2. Extension of authority. Any
19 existing authority of the depa~tment of revenue or the
20 department of labor to make rules on the subject of the
21 provisions of this act is extended to the provisions of this
22 act.
-End-
SENATE JUDICIARV EX~'B'T NO,_" _.-f __ _ DATE.. J -/9 -8' 7
-2-BIll NO. 1/. B. 78
",/: 1.· .. -:;· ':,
,. : ,
I/II(/{; ';: . :- J •.
," • , t; ~
"f "'--.-March, 18, . ~ 987
$ubJffOJVtd ATIORNEY AT LAW
, 403 W. MENDENHALL BOZEMAN, MONTANA 59715
(406) 586-1617
SENATE JUDICIARY ,/
EXHIBIT NO.~ .
DATEd!d;;;o /1 /997 . BIll' NO' "II;:? 16 .
",- :.,' . • J, ': _, \ ;, : ~ •• _, ,
.'-;~'~/··.;i~ " .. j,:~t>.': .n.·~:' ... :~I-.. ...
,./;.! ',,'Dick 'Corne, .- .... :::>;';:"'.: " :Montana House of Representatives
.1 .•
'.'1,
:-;1~,,;~;,::':>';"'Helena, MT 59620., :""~:" . :.: .. " " ..,:"., ... ~/ .!;:i():··~:>·_;~.:)... '(!::.,'. . '/' , ": _,~ .. ';': ,~. '_.'~~. ;",',~. '._ ' .... ',' ~ ..... ,:\.~~:" ',.:r :,.:i.
)tJ;'.;, .,'.; RE: House 'Bill 495" ',i-' .:(;~,:,~.,,:;:~~:·i,{:l';'. ~.~;t"~~·~:('''''~I~~''··::'·:··''::'''~'~''':> >, ~:'7', ,,' .:\.; ...... ; .. ,~ ... " .' ~";," .. ' . .-'" "".' ,.." " ." - " ~''''''.: ~!~: .. ;,'.:,'., ,i:
\ ... . .,... • ." . r . -; " • ..•.•. ; •. :.~.~~,;~ •. '.~:~., .. J, .. :.; .. ,'-; .. ~".; .. ~ •.• ,'~:,' ~.u;;~ .. r, ,', Dear Dick: .. :.' :~< . . '.'J ','''. I' ., . • "1." .. , '. ,,' . ,". ;. . .' -.;···pr\:"~,,.lt
?/i~/:{r'~;!'-/!~~()~~~~' -B{li1 49 ~ :/;~~~ess~s'- extreme ly i~portant issues face'd'" by' ·':;~i~t;;tr:~::r; .:':':,'{/;'" 'parents, attorneys and judges on a regular basis. Let me first";o,~" . :,:1"':'. t,.. address the proposed lc): "' .:: :,:'ir.'~:'.;r:-'.·>::·.' r', .;.. .! :.f
, , . ','. ,'. r. '>~t..; .... ~','., "If two persons have joint custody of a child under a : ",'.<'
...... .'
).
, .
court order, the offense of custodial interference is ':. .... '. committed if one of them takes, entices or withholds;';: ...
the child from the other where this action ma~ifests a.':' purpose to substantially deprive that parent of parental rights." .,
We can only charge someone with custodial interference now if there is a full custody award to one parent and the other parent interferes. Since joint custody must now be ordered by our courts, barring extenuating circumstances, we see an alarming increase in the number of custodial interference cases for which there is no remedy.
This section is a necessary addition to the present custodial interference law because we now have no way to charge someone with custodial interference if there is an outstanding joint custody order. In short, if laws are a reflection of the current needs of society, the proposed change is necessary and proper.
Secondly, let me refer to the proposed lb):
"Prior to the entry of a court order determining custodial rights one parent takes, entices, or withholds the child from the other parent where the action manifests a purpose to substantially deprive that parent of parental rights;"
This section strengthens our existing custodial interference law in situations where neither parent has a court order. Such situations occur, for example, when one parent asks the other for a divorce, 'and the other then flees with the child. A civil court order can be obtained by the non-offending parent but this is useless to someone who cannot locate the parent to serve civil papers. With the help of law enforcement the chances of locating the offending parent and the child are substantially increased.
: ;.
'".J ••••• /
Dick Corne' March 18, 1937 Page 2
In. any e~ent, does not this, situation fall within a reasonable' definition of custodial interference? Does not the child in this. situation deserve the same protection as one in which there isa court order? '
,,,
Dick, please ~efei't~'my previous letter wherein I include a note . from Mike Salvagni~ Gallatin County Attorney • . , .. , .
. thank you for your help in pursuing this important measure.
McNiel
LM:TS Enclosure
"
.SENATE· JUDICIARY EXHIBIT NO_ S
----~---DATE..... .3 - /9-R7
"'ML MR. 71"
... _.-.'
GAlLATIN COUNTY OFFICE OF THE ATIORNEY 615 SOUTH 16th AVENUE LAW AND JUSTICE CENTER BOZEMAN. MONTANA 59715 TELEPHONE: (406) 585-1410
MIKE SALVAGNI COUNTY ATTORNEY
Detective Paul Erickson Bozeman City Police P.o. Box 640-Bozeman, Montana 59715
November 28, 1986
Re: Request for Prosecution of Lisa Sue Pearson, a/k/a Lisa Sue Anderson, a/k[a Lisa Sue Eldridge
Dear Detective Erickson:
I have reviewed your Request for Prosecution of Lisa Sue Pearson, the statement of Russell Eldridge, and the Separation Agreement concerning the custody of Jenni~er Lee Eldridge.
A person commits the offense of Custodial Interference if having no legal right to do so, the person takes, entices, or withholds from lawful custody any child entrusted by authority of law to the custody of another person. (Section 45-5-304(1), MCA). In this particular case Russell Eldridge and Lisa Sue Pearson equally share the physical custody of Jennifer Eldridge. The time and duration of the physical custody is determined by Lisa Sue Pearson and Russell Eldridge by mutual agreement. The last time that Russell Eldridge saw Jennifer Eldridge was on December 1, 1985, when he took Jennifer to Lisa for a week of visitation. Lisa has apparently left the State of Montana with Jennifer.
I am declining to prosecute Lisa Sue Pearson for Custodial Interference for two reasons. First, the physical custody of Jennifer Eldridge is determined by mutual agreement of Lisa Sue Pearson and Russell Eldridge. I cannot allege that Lisa Sue Pearson took Jennifer from the lawful custody of Russell Eldridge. Jennifer was lawfully in the custody of Lisa. Second, even though Lisa Sue Pearson may be withholding Jennifer from the custody of Russell Eldridge, unless Lisa Sue Pearson and Jennifer are in Gallatin County I cannot charge that the offense of withholding Jennifer has occurred in Gallatin County. The crime of Custodial Interference as defined in Montana may be occurring in another state. If Mr. Eldridge knows where Lisa might be, we could refer the matter to the other state for investigation and possible prosecution depending upon the laws of the other state.
Thank you for your assistance and cooperation in the investigation of this case.
chm
Sincerely,
Mike Salvagni County Attorney
cc: Capt. Dick Boyer, Bozeman Police Department
SENATE JUDICIARY EXHIBIT NO. __ S ___ _
DATE.. J -/9 -J'7 BllL NO. /I~ 73
Linda McNiel, 403 w. Mendenh.-=! 11 _ ~Il ; t-", a 0,...,.", ... ",,1"\ u ..
January 9, 1987
$ub.Jf!aA/' td AITOANEY AT LAW
403 W. MENDENHALL BOZEMAN, MONTANA ~9715
(4~6) 586-1617 i
Representative ~ohn Vincent Office of the Minority Leader Capitol Station Hel~na, HT 59620
RE: Proposed change in Custodial Interference Statute (45-5-304 M.C.A.)
Dear John:
Thank you very much for taking time to respond .. to my letter of December 5, 1986.,
Pursuant to our phone conversation of December 29 I have drafted a proposed amended custodial interference statute.
As you are aware, the present wording of our statute does not cover a joint child custody arrangement. In other words, we cannot charge a parent with custodial interference if the parents have joint custody. The reason we cannot charge that parent is because he/she is not interfering with the "lawful custody" of another. ---
Since, according to our statutes, an award of joint custody is presumptively in a child's best interest, we find an increasing number of joint custody awards. More and more children are therefore subjected to child snatching with no remedy to the nonoffending parent. My December 5 letter is one unhappy example.
John,I hope you can help. Please let me know what I can do.
LM:TS cc: Dorothy
Dorothy Wom~n's
SENATE JUDICIARY EXHII3IT NO. & ___ _ DATE. JJ:lcl-l,Ci; / ~< /1'.
(//, <-
BIU NoLiS /~ Proposed amendments to HB679, third reading copy (blue)
1. Title, line 4. Following: "ALLOCATE" Strike: "50 PERCENT" Insert: "A PORTION"
2. Title, line 6. Following: "ABUSE" Insert: "AND OTHER CRIMES"
3. Page 2, line 4. Following: "collected" Insert: " [, except for fines collected by a justice court and
distributed pursuant to 3-10-601,] " •
4. Page 2, line 20. Following: line 19 Insert: "NEW SECTION. Section 3. Coordination instruction. If
House Bill 740, including the section of that b~ll amending 3-10-601 to provide a percentage of fines to be allocated to the battered spouses and domestic violence grant program, is not passed and approved, the bracketed language in Section 1(3) is void."
Renumber: subsequent section
C:\LANE\WP\AMDHB679.
..
50th Legislature LC 1067/01 r ~ .A_~ -.~ /~'-:'I_ LC 1067/01 4 ~ f4"1 7r"- C4~-<:7J~ a.. "L.u.~~~~ ~::tD 3-lo-60/"'J
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
INTRODUCED BY ,~"M() I./luw, '4JItL -lh ~ (;4-/
( ~~ /VA TJ-I-<- uJ POR.rltJN ~ A BILL FOR AN ACT ENTITLED: "AN ACT TO ALLOCATE ~ I'P.Mt"!'!I.:r: V OF THE REVENUE FROM FINES FOR THE COMMISSION OF THE CRIMINAL
~OTUI'R C IU 111 ¢.S.1 OFFENSE OF DOMESTIC ABUSE TO THE BATTERED SPOUSES AND
DOMESTIC VIOLENCE GRANT PROGRAM 1 AMENDING SECTIONS 40-2-405
AND 46-18-235, MCAl AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE,"
BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF MONTANA:
Section 1. Section 46-18-235, MCA, is amended to read:
"46-18-235. Disposition of money collected as fines
and costs. The money collected by a court as a result of the
imposition of fines or assessment of costs under
provisions of 46-18-231 and 46-18-232 shall be' paid to
county general fund of the county in which the court
held, except that:
the ~ r-
the r-2:
.0 loS'
(1) if the costs assessed include any district courtl~ expense listed in 3-5-901, the money collected froml~
o :l> -I
assessment of these costs must be paid to the department ofl~ I I commerce for deposit into the state general fund to the ~ ~ extent the expenses were paid by the statel and
(2) if the fine was imposed for a violation of Title
~ :I: OJ :::j
:z !='
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
~14 :2: ;»15 -I ", 16 ..... 6 17
~18 ;» ;:c -<19
20
21
enforcement agency which made
conviction and fine arose71 and
31 if the fine was
from which the
a violation of
45-5-206, 50% be deposited in
the state special revenue fund for use of the department of
social and rehabilitation services in the battered spouses
and domestic violence grant program created by 40-2-401."
Section 2. Section 40-2-405, MCA, is amended to read:
"40-2-405. Funding. (1) Revenue from the marriage
license fee~ and the fee collected for filing a declaration
of marriage without solemnization, and the portion of fines
allocated to this program by 46-18-235 is the primary source
of funding for the battered spouses and domestic violence
program. The disposition of the marriage license fee is as
established in 25-1-201.
(2) Twenty percent of the operational costs of a
battered spouses and domestic violence program must come
from the local community served by the program. The local
contribution may include in-kind contributions."
" .' NEW SECTION. Section)f. Effective date. This act
effective July 1, 1987.
-End-
24 45, chapter 9, the court may order the money paid into the
25 drug forfeiture fund maintained under 44-12-206 for the
(w ~n. ,,,,,Istat ••• .... BIll .. er\~l aI &ii
- -SECTION. Section 3. Coordination instruction. If House Bill 740, including the section of that bill amending I
ou.3-10-601 to provide a percentage of fines to be~llocated to thee .'.,ttered spouses and domestic violence gran~rogram, iS
J
. ",~ot~'-:ps~n~ ~:o" t_na_te<1lllng~ 1_ _ "ec~ l~ 1S~ld. __
Proposed amendments to HB283 (Darko):
1. Title, lines 5 and 6. Following: IITO II on line 5
SENATE jUOlCI~Y
EXHIBIT ~Q. , < /; 'j -DATE I; It! I ( ,I ,I . 1..-7
11/-' - 8...::; Bill NO. ItL'\' J'- /
Strike: the remainder of line 5 through IIFOR" on line 6 Insert: "LIMIT WHEN"
2. Title, line 6. Following: II PARENT" S t r ike: "TO II Insert: II MAY II
3. Page 2, line 11. Following: IIparent" Insert: II:
(a}1I
4. Page 2, lines 12 through 19. Following: IIconsent ll on line 12 Strike: the remainder of line 12 through line 19 Insert: II;
(b) has not contributed, if able, to the support of the child during a period of 1 year preceding the change; or
(c) has been given written notice, as provided in subsection (5), and opportunity to seek a modification of
~ the decree or order to provide a new visitation schedule and to apportion transportation costs between the parents.
(5) The written notice required by subsection (4) must be served personally or by certified mail not less than 30 days before the proposed change in residence. If a motion to modify is not filed within the 30-day period, the custodial parent may change the child's residence without hearing or further notice. This subsection does not affect or otherwise limit any subsequent motion for modification. 1I
C:\LANE\WP\AMDHB283.
~ .... .... ~
~ ~ ~
~ ~ I " -.() I ~
'J ~
:c
0:1
=i
:z
9
, ,
50
th L
eg
isla
ture
H
B
02
83
/03
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
.~
20
:z
~
21
,.,.,
22
.... c:
: S2
2
3
C')
S;;
24
:::0
-<
2
5
HO
USE
B
ILL
N
O.
28
3
INT
RO
DU
CE
D
BY
DA
RK
O,
J.
BRO
WN
BY
RE
QU
EST
O
F T
HE
C
HIL
D
SUPP
OR
T
AD
VIS
OR
Y
CO
UN
CIL
LI/
I1:r
r
w H
[;N
A
B
ILL
FO
R
AN
A
CT
EN
TIT
LE
D:
"AN
A
CT
TO
It
r:O
tHIU
: A
II
ftl'r'
fr:l
f
KlIJ
Y
Ir6
ftf!
t:to
tfJlt
'f
8ft
e
Si:
lR'f
8
RB
8R
P
SR
A
CU
ST
OD
IAL
P
AR
EN
T-'
feo
MO
VE
A
CH
ILD
'S
RE
SID
EN
CE
O
UT
SID
E
TH
E
ST
AT
E;
TO
M
AK
E A
C
US
TO
DIA
L
PA
RE
NT
'S
AT
TE
MPT
S T
O
PRE
VE
NT
C
ON
TA
CT
O
R
VIS
ITA
TIO
N
BET
WEE
N
TH
E
CH
ILD
A
ND
T
HE
N
ON
CU
STO
DIA
L
PAR
EN
T
A
BA
SIS
FO
R
MO
DIF
ICA
TIO
N
OF
Til
E
CU
STO
DY
D
EC
RE
E;
AN
D
AM
EN
DIN
G
SE
CT
ION
S
40
-4-2
17
A
ND
4
0-4
-21
9,
MC
A."
BE
IT
EN
AC
TE
D
BY
Til
E
LE
GIS
LA
TU
RE
O
F T
HE
S
TA
TE
O
F
MO
NTA
NA
:
Secti
on
1
. S
ecti
on
4
0-4
-21
7,
HC
A,
is
am
en
ded
to
re
ad
:
"4
0-4
-21
7.
Vis
itati
on
. (1
)
A
pare
nt
no
t g
ran
ted
cu
sto
dy
o
f th
e
ch
ild
is
en
titl
ed
to
re
aso
nab
le
vis
itati
on
rig
hts
u
nle
ss
the
co
urt
fi
nd
s,
afte
r
a h
eari
ng
, th
at
vis
itati
on
w
ou
ld
en
dan
ger
seri
ou
sly
th
e
ch
ild
's
ph
ysic
al,
men
tal,
m
ora
l,
or
em
oti
on
al
healt
h.
(2)
In
a p
roceed
ing
fo
r d
isso
luti
on
o
f m
arr
iag
e
or
leg
al
sep
ara
tio
n,
the
co
urt
m
ay,
up
on
th
e
peti
tio
n
of
a
gra
nd
pare
nt,
g
ran
t re
aso
nab
le
vis
itati
on
ri
gh
ts
to
the
gra
nd
pare
nt
of
the
ch
ild
if
th
e
co
urt
fi
nd
s,
afte
r
a
heari
ng
, th
at
the v
isit
ati
on
w
ou
ld
be
in
the
best
inte
rest
of
the ch
ild
.
~n •• ..
"".,
,:.
C4
un
d1
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10
(I)
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
, ~
HB
0
28
3/0
3
(3)
Th
e co
urt
m
ay
mo
dif
y
an
o
rder
gra
nti
ng
o
r d
en
yin
g
vis
itati
on
ri
gh
ts
wh
en
ev
er
mo
dif
icati
on
w
ou
ld
serv
e
the b
est
inte
rest
of
the
ch
ild
; b
ut
the
co
urt
sh
all
n
ot
restr
ict
a
pare
nt'
s
vis
itati
on
ri
gh
ts
un
less
it
fin
ds
that
the
vis
itati
on
w
ou
ld
en
dan
ger
seri
ou
sly
th
e ch
ild
's p
hy
sic
al,
men
tal,
m
ora
l,
or
em
oti
on
al
healt
h.
(4)
So
lo
ng
as
a n
on
cu
sto
dia
l p
are
nt
wh
o
has
been
gra
nte
d
vis
itati
on
ri
gh
ts
by
th
e
co
urt
o
r b
y
a cu
sto
dy
ag
reem
en
t re
main
s a
resid
en
t o
f th
is
sta
te,
a R
ES
IDE
NT
cu
sto
dia
l p
are
nt ~
SHA
LL
n
ot
ch
an
ge
the ch
ild
's
resid
en
ce
: lo.
.. )
to an
oth
er
sta
te
be
eo
re
UN
LE
SS
the
no
ncu
sto
dia
l parent~
giv
en
w
ritt
en
co
nse
nt
Of
has
be
eJi
giv
En
h
ott
eE
ti
tld-
cTf
opportnnyt!~or-ePOH
ihE
CH
nNeE
IS
A
LLO
WED
B~n--o~
"'f'
Iff!
--€
OO
R'f
'--I
IIt"
f'E
R--
tte
'l'I
eE
'l'a
TH
e-N
6I1
CU
S'l'O
Bf*
fr-P
I'IR
EN
'l'-
#IN
f}-,
o,.
he
art
ilY
. Y
he
PU[POS~
___ o
f __
~he
h'§
?!t
)i&
:: ____
t~
LQ
¢ilIO
N
the
1I0
llC
US
LU
OId
I p
dl
ell,,
" co
::n=IIC"~IOu-~ L ~CClC: O
lur.
-t:n
:--"
!T.[
"""!
) __
,,!f
51
L~~ L
Oll
sch
ed
ulE
. li
rE
CO
Utl
li
la}
Ulo
dif
} _~
_h~_
~~i
e_!,
__ ~~epee
he "r8
vis
e
-,
ilew
v
isit
ati
on
sc
lrcil
ale
d
ad
to
lS
Pf'_
~fti
oii
tzu
ilS
pO
Lle
tiu
n-
(b)
--
-".
co
sts
b
Ctw
CC
ii
the
pa
re
fill!!
, II
;
(Co
) ..
. (s. )
,
Secti
on
2
. S
ecti
on
4
0-4
-21
9,
MC
A,
i! a
men
ded
to
re
ad
:
"4
0-4
-21
9.
Mo
dif
icati
on
. (1
) T
he
co
urt
m
ay
in its
dis
cre
tio
n
mo
dif
y
a p
rio
r cu
sto
dy
d
ecre
e if
it
fi
nd
s,
up
on
the
basis
o
f fa
cts
th
at
hav
e ari
sen
sin
ce
the
pri
or
decre
e
or
that
were
u
nk
no
wn
to
th
e
co
urt
at
the
tim
e
of
en
try
o
f
the
pri
or
decre
e,
that
a ch
an
ge
has
occu
rred
in
th
e
-2-
HB
28
3
THIR
D
REA
DIN
G
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
to
0
Q ~3
;::::
J;..
r-
-i
::r:
::z:
z r
OJ ~4
:::>
=::j
m
....
]5
c::
~~o
~
I C"
>
~"
~ I
-<
" ~ u I
'-
HB
0
28
3/0
3
cir
cu
msta
nces
of
the
ch
ild
o
r h
is
cu
sto
dia
n
and
th
at
the
mo
dif
icati
on
is
n
ecessary
to
se
rve
the
best
in
tere
st
of
the
ch
ild
an
d
if it
fu
rth
er
fin
ds
that:
(a)
the
cu
sto
dia
n ag
rees
to
the
mo
dif
icati
on
;
(bl
the
ch
ild
h
as
been
in
teg
rate
d
into
th
e
fam
ily
o
f
the p
eti
tio
ner
wit
h
co
nsen
t o
f th
e cu
sto
dia
n;
(c)
the
ch
ild
's
pre
sen
t en
vir
on
men
t en
dan
gers
seri
ou
sly
h
is
ph
ysic
al,
m
en
tal,
m
ora
l,
or
em
oti
on
al
healt
h
an
d
the
har
m
lik
ely
to
b
e
cau
sed
b
y
a ch
an
ge
of
en
vir
on
men
t
is
ou
tweig
hed
b
y it
s
ad
van
tag
es
to
him
; o
r
(d)
the
ch
ild
is
1
4
years
o
f ag
e o
r o
lder
an
d
desir
es
the modification7~
Ie)
the
cu
sto
dia
n w
illf
ull
y
an
d co
nsis
ten
tly
:
(i)
re
fuses
to
all
ow
th
e
ch
ild
to
h
av
e
an
y co
nta
ct
wit
h
the
no
ncu
sto
dia
l p
are
nt;
O
R
t~~t-attempts--to---al~enate---the---eh~id---from---the
nonetlstod~ai-parentr-or
t~~~t(II)
att
em
pts
to
fr
ustr
ate
o
r den~,
the
no
ncu
sto
dia
l p
are
nt'
s
ex
erc
ise o
f v
isit
ati
on
ri
gh
ts.
(2)
Th
e co
urt
sh
all
p
resu
me
the
cu
sto
dia
n
is
no
t
acti
ng
in
th
e
ch
ild
's
best
inte
rest
if
the
cu
sto
dia
n
do
es
~~he
acts
sp
ecif
ied
in
su
bsecti
on
(l)
(e).
t~tlll
Att
orn
ey
fe
es
and
co
sts
sh
all
b
e assessed
ag
ain
st
a p
art
y
seek
ing
m
od
'ifi
cati
on
if
th
e co
urt
fi
nd
s
that
the
mo
dif
icati
on
acti
on
is
v
ex
ati
ou
s
an
d
co
nsti
tute
s
-3-
liB
2
83
~t-t(,:1'
~.","' ...
.m·~ii'il,")1
~,l'
;;,?
.i'.
;;
1 2 3
( a,
~:.II
HB
0
28
3/0
3
hara
ssm
en
t.
t 3ti
!l
A c
ust
od
y
decre
e
may
b
e m
od
ifie
d
up
on
th
e
death
of
the cu
sto
dia
l p
are
nt
pu
rsu
an
t to
4
0-4
-22
1."
-En
d-
-4-
~~
-~ ~
(..
--~ ~
, .
HB
2
83
..
SUPPLEMENTAL STATEMENT IN SUPPORT OF AMENDMENTS TO HOUSE BILL 344
TO SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE
FROM CHADWICK H. SMITH
DATE MARCH 19, 1987
SENATE JUDICIARY EXHIBIT NO OAT IJPr-~"--h'"':"'/'''''1'''9B-7l BIll No.ilL:? ,_?yC!
In the course of the hearing on House Bill 344 before the Senate Judiciary Committee on March 18, 1987, an amendment providing for application of the bill to all incidents or causes of action not yet filed in court was discussed. The Chairman invited further information expressing the attitude of insurance underwriters regarding the language of the bill and~the language of the proposed amendment insofar as impact on insurance premiums is concerned.
Mr. Jim Ahrens, President of the Montana Hospital Association, contacted the Pennsylvania Hospital Insurance Company (PHICO), because it is one of the principal malpractice insurers of hospitals in Montana, and asked the head actuary, Mr. Peter Henning, how the insurance company would apply the language in each cage. The response was that the present language of the bill would not afford a basis for actuarial recomputation because there would be no substantial change in risk factors for several years. He further mentioned that the company would have to recognize the change in potential liability if the proposed amendment were adopted because it would have an immediate application to risk. The extent of the application would depend on the volume of cases affected, the potential liability assessed, and the language of other provisions in the new law. The new law may require a test case to learn the Montana Supreme Court's opinion on the language before it is relied upon. The actuary was joined by Arthur Becker, the General Counsel of the company, in the conference call. Although written commitment could not be obtained without time for research, we invite the Senate Judiciary Committee to telephone these officers to confirm this information, if desired, by calling 717-766-1122.
The lanugage offered in the proposed amendment on applicability is supported by Montana case law as shown in the legal brief submitted at hearing. The application provision has been enacted in other states with success. There is no point in enacting a law which does not operate to solve the insurance problem facing Montana hospitals now. Without immediate application, premiums will continue to escalate. In any event, the worst that could happen would be for the Montana courts to rule that the new law cannot apply to incidents which have already occurred and, of course, that is the present language of the bill anyway. We have everything to gain and nothing to lose by enacting language that addresses the problem!
Your favorable consideration of the amendments is respectfully requested.
~.,
STANDING COMMITTEE REPORT
~{arch 19 37 ......................................................... 19 ......... .
MR. PRESIDENT
. SENATE JUOICLA~Y We, your committee on ................................................................................................................................... .
. .. BOOSE BILL 78 having had under consideration ........................................................................................................ No ............... ..
color
PeraiL ~tt4ebment or sarciahment of workers' coap. to pay ehilJ support. ErO¥n (3all1gan)
HOUSE BILL 78 Respectfully report as follows: That .................................................................................................. No ................ .
1. Title, line 6. Following: ·COMPENSA~IO~Strike: "t.trltJP-SU!4-
2. P~qP 1, line 17. ?Dllo'i·Ii;'iq': .. (!.~) -3trika: -to d~r4?· In:;a~rt.: Ita "'portion of any lump-suJI1 award or periodic payment to
pay·
J. Page 1, lines 19 and 20. Fol1owinq: ·wh6nftV~r· on line 19 ~'jf:,rUaH th~rcmair.der of line 19 through • (i l: ~:.'\ l.tne 20
4.. ?agQ 1, lines :!2 through 25 .. F()llowing~ ·l~w· on lint) 22 Strik~H the wair"tder of line 72 through -.;llLct W on line
5. Page 2, line 1. Followinq: .~&~~~. StrikE':: -1\ r .. UMP-sU!'t ·PAYMEN,.Insert: ·Pa)'mel1ts·· .
Senator ~%ltrhk Chairman.
S~T~ JUDIClAIf
III H. Page 2,
6. PAq@ 2. liae 2. ?ollowinq: ·CHAPTEBStrike.. -IS· Inse.t"tt ·u@· 1. Page 2# I1n. 3. ¥cllowiD9' ·fe~}ew.~· !nsert, -as follows t -
-.........-. '..
3. l'agIJ 2# lines 11 throaqh 14.
........................ ~!;~~.J? ................. 19 . .fn ... .
!'ollOl1i!!qt .l'~~. on 11n& 11 . Strikttsthe re •• indbr of line 11 thrO'Q9b ·SUPPORT- OR lin. 14 In.ert: • (al for any pt'r1odle p.YMOnt~ an tU\6unt up to the
pereentaqo .aount eatablt.hed in the qu1de11ncs pro~ulqatad 1n supr~e court Order ~o. 96-223, dated Ja~uary 13, 1987, or
(b) Eor any ll.Ulp-e .. aw.rd,.al1 amount up to thAt. ';.'ortioD cf tha award that 1s appro .. d for payment on the basts of a past-due child support obliqatloa-
STANDING COMMITTEE REPORT
.......... ~~~~~~ ... ~~ ............................... 19.~.? .... .
" MR. PRESIDENT
. SruiA:1"f: JUDICIAtl' We, your committee on ................................... ,' ............................................................................................... .
having had under consideration ........................................................................ m~~~~ .. ~Jl,r. ............ No ... }.4.4 ...... ..
'third ~ reading copy ( b=,l=:u=-:s=---__ color
!\evise time l1.rtits for !?<edical ezalpractiee .actione. May (~zlaek)
couSt BILL 344 Respectfully report as follows: That.. ................................................................................................ No ................ .
1;y~:H~
:'D~bTX?A~
be .. enued tUl followed:
1. Title, 1108 7. Strike: u.A:lif
Pollowing: n~~.pj~" Inser t: ItFOK ar.TaoAC!IV~" Following: n APPf;.I;CADILI'I'Y" Strike: "DATE"
2. Page 1, lines 12 through 18. Str~e: subsection (2) 1~ its entirety
"
Insert: 1* (2) The t:h~ lilaitstl.ons in 5gbseetioQ (1) ~r8 appllc:aule to a minor who va. undor the age of 4 on the date of hie injury or death notvitustand1ng the provisions of 27-2-401, except that sucb tta. 11~itationa are tolled for a .tnor:
(a) u~:il the aiuor bec01IQ Q ,ears of Age, or die., whichever occurs first; ~nd (~) durinR any period that the micor dees aut reside vito a parent or gaardian.
3. Page 2. line 19 through l1. 1"'ollov1n~: t~ ApplicabUity. ff 5trll.:..e: tHe rea1nder' of line 19 th'['Ou~h line 21 Ins.rt: "(1) An actiou referred to in 27-2-20S{2) for injury or death occurring prior to Or.tcber 1, 19~7. must be CORBenced within Z yearn after tr~ effective ~~te of this aet or vi thin t~e ti~ l~t. in 27-2-205(2). wu1cnover ~xp1rea last.
(2) TJia act ~?plic9 ratroactively, vithin the sean1n,. of 1-2-109, to C4U!5$S of action that !3rose prior to October I. 19J7 ....
:dD AS .MfEtmf.D
St: CO!lCl1!tRE!) Ii:
......................................................................................
Setll1tor :1.3zurdt Chairman.
STANDING COMMITTEE REPORT
:l'lt'ch l~ ;~1 ......................................................... 19 ......... .
MR. PRESIDENT
. S::~l'Z JiJDICL\ilY We, your committee on ................................................................................................................................... .
. .. HOUSE 8tLL 619 having had under consideration ........................................................................................................ No ................ .
____ T_b_1_t'_d_ reading copy (_b_l_tl_e __ color
? Allocate. :1omest1.c abuse finea to fund. batu-.:ed aoases program. iltceuau (neck)
HOUSE BI!.:. 679 Respectfully report as follows: That .................................................................................................. No ................ .
1. Tltl~~ li~~ 4. Pollowinq: -ALLOCATEStrik~H "50 PRR.C~NT· rnu~rt: -A PORTION"
2. Titlo, line 6. P.ollowillf"P • ABUSF.· Insert: "AND OTHER CRIMES·
3. PRry9 2, lina 4. Follovinq: ~~ull~ctedO
"
In:gcrt: i. i # -c:Jr.coi;Ctor Cim:n c.r;,11(}ctoo by .e jl.1~tic1! court and distribotod purnuant to 3-10-601,1 •
4. Page 2, line 10. ?ollowing: line 19 Insert! "~.~'f:>,f GECT!O:!'l. ~j.:!ctim·. 3. Coordination iwnruct.ion. Zf
~oUSQ-sril 740;-including the section of thAt bill amending 3-10-601 to provide (\ perc~ntage of fine's ~o b~ allocated to tho ~.:ltter!;d ~rOUGt;l$ and dQ~'fl~tytlc violfu1ce qr.snt. ?rogr2lm. 1s not ;?d~s0d and ~~)provfl.id, th~ hrackf!t:ef.1 langua,1'.!- in ZoCtiDn 1(3) is void.-
RCr.tuw.be!": stlbstlo:u~n t ::;~ct.1l)n
...................................................................................... S~nator H4~urek. Chairman.