AB 1194

  • California Assembly Bill
  • 2021-2022 Regular Session
  • Introduced in Assembly
  • Assembly
  • Senate
  • Governor

Conservatorship.

Bill Subjects

Conservatorship.

Abstract

Existing law, the Guardianship-Conservatorship Law generally establishes the standards and procedures for the appointment and termination of an appointment for a guardian or conservator of a person, an estate, or both. Existing law, the Professional Fiduciaries Act, establishes the Professional Fiduciaries Bureau within the Department of Consumer Affairs, and requires the bureau to license and regulate professional fiduciaries. The act defines a "professional fiduciary" as, among other things, a person who acts as a guardian or conservator of the person, the estate, or the person and estate, for 2 or more individuals at the same time who are not related to the professional fiduciary or to each other. Existing law requires the court to be guided by what appears to be the best interests of the proposed conservatee in selecting a conservator, and sets forth an order of preference for appointment if there are multiple persons equally qualified to be the conservator. This bill would require a professional fiduciary with an internet website to post a schedule of fees on their internet website. The bill would require the bureau to revoke a professional fiduciary's license if the licensee is found by the court to have either abused, or breached a fiduciary duty to, a ward or conservatee under their care. If the court finds that a professional conservator has abused a conservatee, the bill would make the conservator liable for a civil penalty of up to $5,000, payable to the estate of the conservatee. The bill would make a nonprofessional conservator who abuses a conservatee liable for civil penalties of up to $1,000, payable to the estate of the conservatee. The bill would require a court to report to the bureau when the court takes action to discipline a professional fiduciary, finds that a professional fiduciary has abused the conservatee, sanctions or removes for cause a professional fiduciary, or determines that cause for removal exists for a professional fiduciary. Existing law requires a court investigator to undertake specified actions regarding a proposed conservatee, including interviewing the proposed conservatee. Existing law authorizes specified persons to petition the court to take specified actions regarding a conservatorship. This bill would require a court investigator to gather and review relevant medical reports and supplemental information regarding a proposed conservatee, including at least one report from their primary care physician. The bill would require a court investigator to report to the bureau if they undertake an investigation of a fiduciary. The bill would authorize any person to petition the court to investigate an allegation of physical abuse or financial abuse of a conservatee by a conservator, and would require the court to investigate those allegations. Existing law prohibits a guardian or trustee who is not a trust company from hiring or referring business to an entity in which the guardian or trustee has a financial interest, except upon authorization of the court. Existing law prohibits compensating a guardian or trustee from the estate for the costs or fees they incurred in unsuccessfully opposing a petition or other action made by or on behalf of a ward or conservatee, unless the court determines the opposition was made in good faith, based on the best interests of the ward or conservatee. If the court removes the guardian or conservatee for cause, existing law requires the court to award the petitioner for that removal the costs of the petition and other expenses and costs of litigation, unless the court determines the guardian or conservator acted in good faith, based on the best interests of the ward or conservatee. This bill would eliminate the court's discretion to authorize a guardian or trustee who is not a trust company to hire or refer business to an entity in which they have a financial interest. The bill would eliminate the court's discretion to compensate a guardian or conservator from the estate for the costs or fees they incurred in unsuccessfully opposing a petition or other action made by or on behalf of a ward or conservatee, and would instead prohibit a guardian or conservator from being compensated from the estate for the costs or fees they incurred in unsuccessfully defending a reduction or denial of their compensation. The bill would require the court to award the costs of the petition and other expenses and costs of litigation to a successful petitioner if a guardian or conservatee is removed for cause. The bill would require the Judicial Council to report to the Legislature, on or before January 1, 2023, regarding specified findings and recommendations on court effectiveness in conservatorship cases. Existing law authorizes a court to refer certain issues relating to a conservatorship to a court investigator and prescribes the duties of an investigator in this regard, which include interviewing specified relatives of a proposed conservatee, conducting investigations of, and reporting to a court about, the appropriateness of a conservatorship, and, to the extent practicable, reviewing accountings with a conservatee. Existing law requires a court to review each limited conservatorship one year after the appointment of the conservator and biennially thereafter. Existing law permits specified parties to file a petition for an appointment of a temporary guardian or a temporary conservator and establishes requirements for the petition and for notice of the hearing on the petition. Existing law makes the requirement that a court implement these provisions contingent on the Legislature appropriating moneys for that purpose. This bill would require the court to implement the above-described provisions, without a specific appropriation.

Bill Sponsors (3)

Votes


Actions


Apr 21, 2021

Assembly

From committee chair, with author's amendments: Amend, and re-refer to Com. on JUD. Read second time and amended.

Apr 14, 2021

Assembly

From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on JUD. (Ayes 17. Noes 0.) (April 13). Re-referred to Com. on JUD.

  • Committee-Passage
  • Committee-Passage-Favorable
  • Referral-Committee
Com. on JUD.

Apr 07, 2021

Assembly

Re-referred to Com. on B. & P.

  • Referral-Committee
Com. on B. & P.

Apr 06, 2021

Assembly

From committee chair, with author's amendments: Amend, and re-refer to Com. on B. & P. Read second time and amended.

Mar 30, 2021

Assembly

Re-referred to Com. on B. & P.

  • Referral-Committee
Com. on B. & P.

Mar 29, 2021

Assembly

From committee chair, with author's amendments: Amend, and re-refer to Com. on B. & P. Read second time and amended.

Mar 23, 2021

Assembly

Re-referred to Com. on B. & P.

  • Referral-Committee
Com. on B. & P.

Mar 22, 2021

Assembly

From committee chair, with author's amendments: Amend, and re-refer to Com. on B. & P. Read second time and amended.

Mar 18, 2021

Assembly

Referred to Coms. on B. & P. and JUD.

  • Referral-Committee
Coms. on B. & P. and JUD.

Feb 19, 2021

Assembly

From printer. May be heard in committee March 21.

Feb 18, 2021

Assembly

Read first time. To print.

Bill Text

Bill Text Versions Format
AB1194 HTML
02/18/21 - Introduced PDF
03/22/21 - Amended Assembly PDF
03/29/21 - Amended Assembly PDF
04/06/21 - Amended Assembly PDF
04/21/21 - Amended Assembly PDF

Related Documents

Document Format
No related documents.

Sources

Data on Open States is updated nightly from the official website of the California State Legislature.

If you notice any inconsistencies with these official sources, feel free to file an issue.