Individual legislator voting records for this vote are not currently available. Includes all politicians who were in office at any point during the 2011-2012 Legislature.

AB 2149 - An Act to Add Section 15657.8 to the Welfare and Institutions Code, Relating to Elder and Dependent Adults.

Elder and dependent adult abuse: settlement: gag order. 2011-2012 Legislature. View bill details
Author(s):
Summary:
The Elder Abuse and Dependent Adult Civil Protection Act proscribes crimes against elder and dependent adults involving physical and financial abuse. The act provides for the award of attorney’s fees and costs, and damages to a plaintiff, when it is proven that a defendant is liable for physical abuse, neglect, or financial abuse, and the defendant has also been guilty of recklessness,… More
The Elder Abuse and Dependent Adult Civil Protection Act proscribes crimes against elder and dependent adults involving physical and financial abuse. The act provides for the award of attorney’s fees and costs, and damages to a plaintiff, when it is proven that a defendant is liable for physical abuse, neglect, or financial abuse, and the defendant has also been guilty of recklessness, oppression, fraud, or malice in the commission of the abuse.

The Civil Discovery Act provides that it is the policy of the state that confidential settlement agreements are disfavored in any civil action the factual foundation for which establishes a cause of action for violation of the Elder Abuse and Dependent Adult Civil Protection Act. The Civil Discovery Act prohibits the court from recognizing or enforcing provisions of such a confidential settlement agreement in the absence of specified conditions.

This bill would provide that an agreement, entered on or after January 1, 2013, to settle a civil action for physical abuse, neglect, or financial abuse of an elder or dependent adult shall not include any provision that, among other things, prohibits contact or cooperation with the county adult protective services agency, the local law enforcement agency, the long-term care ombudsman, the California Department of Aging, the Department of Justice, or the Licensing and Certification Division of the State Department of Public Health, the State Department of Developmental Services, the State Department of State Hospitals, a licensing or regulatory agency that has jurisdiction over the license or certification of the defendant, any other governmental entity, a protection and advocacy agency, as defined, or the defendant’s current employer if the defendant’s job responsibilities include contact with elders, dependent adults, or children, as specified. The bill would provide that any such provision is void as against public policy. Hide
 
Status:
The bill has become law (chaptered). 
Senate Vote: On Passage

PASSED on August 22, 2012.

voted YES: 25 voted NO: 10
5 voted present/not voting

An Act to Add Section 15657.8 to the Welfare and Institutions Code, Relating to Elder and Dependent Adults.

AB 2149 — 2011-2012 Legislature

Summary
The Elder Abuse and Dependent Adult Civil Protection Act proscribes crimes against elder and dependent adults involving physical and financial abuse. The act provides for the award of attorney’s fees and costs, and damages to a plaintiff, when it is proven that a defendant is liable for physical abuse, neglect, or financial abuse, and the defendant has also been guilty of recklessness, oppression, fraud, or malice in the commission of the abuse.

The Civil Discovery Act provides that it is the policy of the state that confidential settlement agreements are disfavored in any civil action the factual foundation for which establishes a cause of action for violation of the Elder Abuse and Dependent Adult Civil Protection Act. The Civil Discovery Act prohibits the court from recognizing or enforcing provisions of such a confidential settlement agreement in the absence of specified conditions.

This bill would provide that an agreement, entered on or after January 1, 2013, to settle a civil action for physical abuse, neglect, or financial abuse of an elder or dependent adult shall not include any provision that, among other things, prohibits contact or cooperation… More
The Elder Abuse and Dependent Adult Civil Protection Act proscribes crimes against elder and dependent adults involving physical and financial abuse. The act provides for the award of attorney’s fees and costs, and damages to a plaintiff, when it is proven that a defendant is liable for physical abuse, neglect, or financial abuse, and the defendant has also been guilty of recklessness, oppression, fraud, or malice in the commission of the abuse.

The Civil Discovery Act provides that it is the policy of the state that confidential settlement agreements are disfavored in any civil action the factual foundation for which establishes a cause of action for violation of the Elder Abuse and Dependent Adult Civil Protection Act. The Civil Discovery Act prohibits the court from recognizing or enforcing provisions of such a confidential settlement agreement in the absence of specified conditions.

This bill would provide that an agreement, entered on or after January 1, 2013, to settle a civil action for physical abuse, neglect, or financial abuse of an elder or dependent adult shall not include any provision that, among other things, prohibits contact or cooperation with the county adult protective services agency, the local law enforcement agency, the long-term care ombudsman, the California Department of Aging, the Department of Justice, or the Licensing and Certification Division of the State Department of Public Health, the State Department of Developmental Services, the State Department of State Hospitals, a licensing or regulatory agency that has jurisdiction over the license or certification of the defendant, any other governmental entity, a protection and advocacy agency, as defined, or the defendant’s current employer if the defendant’s job responsibilities include contact with elders, dependent adults, or children, as specified. The bill would provide that any such provision is void as against public policy. Hide
Learn More
At LegInfo.ca.gov
Title
An Act to Add Section 15657.8 to the Welfare and Institutions Code, Relating to Elder and Dependent Adults.
Author(s)
Betsy Butler
Co-Authors
    Subjects
    • Elder and dependent adult abuse: settlement: gag order
    Major Actions
    Introduced2/23/2012
    Referred to Committee
    Failed passage in Assembly Committee on Judiciary4/10/2012
    Passed Assembly Committee on Judiciary4/10/2012
    Passed Assembly Committee on Judiciary4/24/2012
    Passed Assembly Committee on Aging and Long Term Care5/01/2012
    Passed Assembly5/21/2012
    Passed Assembly5/25/2012
    Passed Senate Committee on Judiciary6/19/2012
    Passed Senate8/22/2012
    Passed Assembly8/27/2012
    Presented to the governor (enrolled)9/10/2012
    Became law (chaptered).9/27/2012
    Bill History
    Chamber/CommitteeMotionDateResult
    select this voteAssembly Committee on JudiciaryDo pass and be re-referred to the Committee on Aging and Long€term Care.4/10/2012This motion DID NOT PASS the Assembly Committee on Judiciary
    5 voted YES 5 voted NO 0 voted present/not voting
    select this voteAssembly Committee on JudiciarySet first hearing. Failed passage. Reconsideration granted.4/10/2012This motion PASSED the Assembly Committee on Judiciary
    10 voted YES 0 voted NO 0 voted present/not voting
    select this voteAssembly Committee on JudiciaryDo pass as amended and be re-referred to the Committee on Aging and Long€term Care.4/24/2012This motion PASSED the Assembly Committee on Judiciary
    6 voted YES 4 voted NO 0 voted present/not voting
    select this voteAssembly Committee on Aging and Long Term CareDo pass.5/01/2012This motion PASSED the Assembly Committee on Aging and Long Term Care
    4 voted YES 2 voted NO 0 voted present/not voting
    select this voteAssemblyAB 2149 BUTLER Assembly Third Reading Amend By BUTLER Set #15/21/2012This bill PASSED the Assembly
    47 voted YES 28 voted NO 5 voted present/not voting
    select this voteAssemblyAB 2149 BUTLER Assembly Third Reading5/25/2012This bill PASSED the Assembly
    43 voted YES 24 voted NO 13 voted present/not voting
    select this voteSenate Committee on JudiciaryDo pass as amended.6/19/2012This motion PASSED the Senate Committee on Judiciary
    4 voted YES 1 voted NO 0 voted present/not voting
    currently selectedSenateAssembly 3rd Reading AB2149 Butler By Corbett8/22/2012This bill PASSED the Senate
    25 voted YES 10 voted NO 5 voted present/not voting
    select this voteAssemblyAB 2149 BUTLER Concurrence in Senate Amendments8/27/2012This bill PASSED the Assembly
    51 voted YES 28 voted NO 1 voted present/not voting
    ActionDateDescription
    Introduced2/23/2012
    2/23/2012Read first time. To print.
    2/24/2012From printer. May be heard in committee March 25.
    3/08/2012Referred to Coms. on JUD. and AGING & L.T.C.
    4/10/2012In committee: Set first hearing. Failed passage. Reconsideration granted.
    select this voteVote4/10/2012Do pass and be re-referred to the Committee on Aging and Long€term Care.
    select this voteVote4/10/2012Set first hearing. Failed passage. Reconsideration granted.
    select this voteVote4/24/2012Do pass as amended and be re-referred to the Committee on Aging and Long€term Care.
    4/25/2012From committee: Do pass as amended and re-refer to Com. on AGING & L.T.C. (Ayes 6. Noes 4.) (April 24).
    4/26/2012Read second time and amended. Assembly Rule 56 suspended. (Page 4547.)
    4/30/2012Re-referred to Com. on AGING & L.T.C.
    select this voteVote5/01/2012Do pass.
    5/02/2012From committee: Do pass. (Ayes 4. Noes 2.) (May 1).
    5/03/2012Read second time. Ordered to third reading.
    5/21/2012Read third time and amended. Ordered to third reading. (Ayes 47. Noes 28. Page 4907.)
    select this voteAssembly Vote on Passage5/21/2012AB 2149 BUTLER Assembly Third Reading Amend By BUTLER Set #1
    5/25/2012Read third time. Passed. Ordered to the Senate. (Ayes 43. Noes 24. Page 4989.)
    5/25/2012In Senate. Read first time. To Com. on RLS. for assignment.
    select this voteAssembly Vote on Passage5/25/2012AB 2149 BUTLER Assembly Third Reading
    6/07/2012Referred to Com. on JUD.
    select this voteVote6/19/2012Do pass as amended.
    6/25/2012From committee: Do pass as amended. (Ayes 4. Noes 1.) (June 19).
    6/26/2012Read second time and amended. Ordered to third reading.
    8/22/2012Read third time. Passed. Ordered to the Assembly. (Ayes 25. Noes 10. Page 4690.).
    8/22/2012In Assembly. Concurrence in Senate amendments pending. May be considered on or after August 24 pursuant to Assembly Rule 77.
    currently selectedSenate Vote on Passage8/22/2012Assembly 3rd Reading AB2149 Butler By Corbett
    8/27/2012Senate amendments concurred in. To Engrossing and Enrolling. (Ayes 51. Noes 28. Page 6314.).
    select this voteAssembly Vote on Passage8/27/2012AB 2149 BUTLER Concurrence in Senate Amendments
    9/10/2012Enrolled and presented to the Governor at 11:25 a.m.
    9/27/2012Approved by the Governor.
    9/27/2012Chaptered by Secretary of State - Chapter 644, Statutes of 2012.

    Total contributions given to Senators from interest groups that…

    16 times as much
    $707,723
    $21,900
    $1,108,000
    $34,500
    $26,787
    $1,898,911
    $88,900
    $31,102
    $120,002

    opposed this bill

    Chambers of commerce [About]
    Pro-business organizations [About]
    Elderly issues & Social Security (split) [About]
    9 Organizations Supported and 3 Opposed; See Which Ones

    Organizations that took a position on
    An Act to Add Section 15657.8 to the Welfare and Institutions Code, Relating to Elder and Dependent Adults.: Assembly 3rd Reading AB2149 Butler By Corbett

    9 organizations supported this bill

    American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees
    Assembly Committee on Judiciary (2012, April 9). Assembly Committee Analysis. Retrieved April 11, 2012, from Leginfo: Bill Analysis.
    California Advocates for Nursing Home Reform
    Assembly Committee on Judiciary (2012, April 9). Assembly Committee Analysis. Retrieved April 11, 2012, from Leginfo: Bill Analysis.
    California Commission on Aging
    Assembly Committee on Judiciary (2012, April 9). Assembly Committee Analysis. Retrieved April 11, 2012, from Leginfo: Bill Analysis.
    California Senior Legislature
    Assembly Committee on Judiciary (2012, April 9). Assembly Committee Analysis. Retrieved April 11, 2012, from Leginfo: Bill Analysis.
    California State Association of Counties
    Assembly Committee on Judiciary (2012, April 9). Assembly Committee Analysis. Retrieved April 11, 2012, from Leginfo: Bill Analysis.
    California State Sheriffs' Association
    Assembly Committee on Judiciary (2012, April 9). Assembly Committee Analysis. Retrieved April 11, 2012, from Leginfo: Bill Analysis.
    Consumer Attorneys of California
    Assembly Committee on Judiciary (2012, April 9). Assembly Committee Analysis. Retrieved April 11, 2012, from Leginfo: Bill Analysis.
    County Welfare Directors Association of California
    Assembly Committee on Judiciary (2012, April 9). Assembly Committee Analysis. Retrieved April 11, 2012, from Leginfo: Bill Analysis.
    Ombudsman & Hicap Services Of Northern California
    Assembly Committee on Judiciary (2012, April 9). Assembly Committee Analysis. Retrieved April 11, 2012, from Leginfo: Bill Analysis.

    3 organizations opposed this bill

    Aging Services of California
    Assembly Committee on Judiciary (2012, April 9). Assembly Committee Analysis. Retrieved April 11, 2012, from Leginfo: Bill Analysis.
    California Chamber of Commerce
    Assembly Committee on Judiciary (2012, April 9). Assembly Committee Analysis. Retrieved April 11, 2012, from Leginfo: Bill Analysis.
    Civil Justice Association of California
    Assembly Committee on Judiciary (2012, April 9). Assembly Committee Analysis. Retrieved April 11, 2012, from Leginfo: Bill Analysis.

    Need proof?

    View citations of support and opposition

    Includes reported contributions to campaigns of Senators in office on day of vote, from interest groups invested in the vote according to MapLight, January 1, 2009 – December 31, 2012.
    Contributions data source: FollowTheMoney.org

    Contributions by Legislator

    Namesort iconPartyDistrict$ From Interest Groups
    That Supported
    $ From Interest Groups
    That Opposed
    Vote
    Elaine AlquistDCA-13$9,450$0
    Joel AndersonRCA-36$40,564$8,200
    Tom BerryhillRCA-14$33,650$11,300
    Sam BlakesleeRCA-15$0$0
    Ron CalderonDCA-30$35,250$6,400
    Anthony CannellaRCA-12$27,050$7,400
    Ellen CorbettDCA-10$37,254$0
    Lou CorreaDCA-34$66,552$4,000
    Kevin De LeonDCA-22$98,031$100
    Mark DeSaulnierDCA-7$74,534$0
    Bob DuttonRCA-31$29,800$2,150
    Bill EmmersonRCA-37$38,850$4,950
    Noreen EvansDCA-2$62,319$0
    Jean FullerRCA-18$15,000$2,500
    Ted GainesRCA-1$16,025$1,500
    Loni HancockDCA-9$79,705$0
    Tom HarmanRCA-35$28,400$3,000
    Ed HernandezDCA-24$82,876$3,000
    Bob HuffRCA-29$62,445$15,100
    Christine KehoeDCA-39$23,300$0
    Doug La MalfaRCA-4$5,400$2,000
    Mark LenoDCA-3$71,399$0
    Ted LieuDCA-28$166,290$4,000
    Carol LiuDCA-21$41,470$0
    Alan LowenthalDCA-27$0$0
    Gloria Negrete McLeodDCA-32$30,350$3,275
    Alex PadillaDCA-20$45,100$3,000
    Fran PavleyDCA-23$137,550$0
    Curren PriceDCA-26$41,800$3,300
    Michael RubioDCA-16$50,292$8,800
    Sharon RunnerRCA-17$9,455$0
    Joe SimitianDCA-11$16,500$0
    Darrell SteinbergDCA-6$136,100$500
    Tony StricklandRCA-19$22,500$4,500
    Juan VargasDCA-40$85,900$4,900
    Mimi WaltersRCA-33$2,000$3,500
    Lois WolkDCA-5$40,450$0
    Rod WrightDCA-25$62,300$7,627
    Mark WylandRCA-38$22,400$1,000
    Leland YeeDCA-8$50,600$4,000

    Add Data Filters:

    Legislator Filters
    Legislator Filters
    Show All
    NamePartyDistrict$ From Interest Groups
    That Supported
    $ From Interest Groups
    That Opposed
    Vote
    Elaine AlquistDCA-13$9,450$0
    Joel AndersonRCA-36$40,564$8,200
    Tom BerryhillRCA-14$33,650$11,300
    Sam BlakesleeRCA-15$0$0
    Ron CalderonDCA-30$35,250$6,400
    Anthony CannellaRCA-12$27,050$7,400
    Ellen CorbettDCA-10$37,254$0
    Lou CorreaDCA-34$66,552$4,000
    Kevin De LeonDCA-22$98,031$100
    Mark DeSaulnierDCA-7$74,534$0
    Bob DuttonRCA-31$29,800$2,150
    Bill EmmersonRCA-37$38,850$4,950
    Noreen EvansDCA-2$62,319$0
    Jean FullerRCA-18$15,000$2,500
    Ted GainesRCA-1$16,025$1,500
    Loni HancockDCA-9$79,705$0
    Tom HarmanRCA-35$28,400$3,000
    Ed HernandezDCA-24$82,876$3,000
    Bob HuffRCA-29$62,445$15,100
    Christine KehoeDCA-39$23,300$0
    Doug La MalfaRCA-4$5,400$2,000
    Mark LenoDCA-3$71,399$0
    Ted LieuDCA-28$166,290$4,000
    Carol LiuDCA-21$41,470$0
    Alan LowenthalDCA-27$0$0
    Gloria Negrete McLeodDCA-32$30,350$3,275
    Alex PadillaDCA-20$45,100$3,000
    Fran PavleyDCA-23$137,550$0
    Curren PriceDCA-26$41,800$3,300
    Michael RubioDCA-16$50,292$8,800
    Sharon RunnerRCA-17$9,455$0
    Joe SimitianDCA-11$16,500$0
    Darrell SteinbergDCA-6$136,100$500
    Tony StricklandRCA-19$22,500$4,500
    Juan VargasDCA-40$85,900$4,900
    Mimi WaltersRCA-33$2,000$3,500
    Lois WolkDCA-5$40,450$0
    Rod WrightDCA-25$62,300$7,627
    Mark WylandRCA-38$22,400$1,000
    Leland YeeDCA-8$50,600$4,000

    Interest Groups that supported this bill

    $ Donated
    Police & fire fighters unions and associations$1,108,000
    State & local government employee unions$707,723
    Welfare & social work$34,500
    Civil servant/public employee$26,787
    Municipal & county government organizations$21,900
    Elderly issues & Social Security$0

    Interest Groups that opposed this bill

    $ Donated
    Chambers of commerce$88,900
    Pro-business organizations$31,102
    Elderly issues & Social Security$0
    Loading…
    Date Range of Contributions
    Enter a custom date range