TCJL Tracking
  HB 4

Ritter, Allan(R) Relating to the creation and funding of the state water implementation fund for Texas to assist the Texas Water Development Board in the funding of certain water-related projects.
General Remarks: Creates the state water implementation fund. TCJL SUPPORTS
Bill History: 03-27-13 H Set on the House Calendar

  HB 5

Aycock, Jimmie Don(R) Relating to public school accountability, including assessment, and curriculum requirements.
Bill History: 03-26-13 H Set on the House Calendar

  HB 11

Ritter, Allan(R) Relating to the appropriation of money from the economic stabilization fund to finance certain water-related projects.
General Remarks: appropriate $2 billion from the state’s Rainy Day Fund to a revolving fund dedicated to building critically needed water infrastructure across the state.
Bill History: 03-11-13 H Committee action pending House Appropriations

  HB 129

Raymond, Richard(D) Relating to recusal of a justice of the supreme court or judge of the court of criminal appeals based on political contributions accepted by the justice or judge from a person involved in a case before the justice or judge.
General Remarks: A Texas Supreme Court justice would be required to recuse himself or herself from any case in which the justice has accepted political contributions from certain persons related to the case.HB 129 would trigger mandatory recusal if during the preceding four years the justice accepted contributions totaling $2,500 or more from:1. a party to the case;

2. an attorney of record in the case;

3. the law firm of an attorney of record in the case;

4. the managing agent of a party to the case;

5. a member of the board of directors of a party to the case; or

6. a general purpose PAC established or administered by a party to the case.

The bill also treats a political contribution made by a person to a general purpose PAC that makes a contribution to a justice as if the person directly made the contribution. For purposes of the $2,500 threshold, the lesser of the total amount of contributions made by the person to the PAC or made by the PAC to the justice controls.

Finally, the bill requires any person who files a motion, brief, or pleading with the Court to disclose all political contributions made by the person to justices of the Court in the preceding four years. The person must also disclose contributions made by anyone affiliated with the person who fits into the above categories or those made by a general-purpose PAC to whom a party or person affiliated with the party made a contribution during the period.

Recusal may be waived if each party in opposition to the party who made the contribution agrees to the waiver. The bill also applies to contributions made to judges of the Court of Criminal Appeals.

Bill History: 02-06-13 H Introduced and referred to committee on House Judiciary and Civil Jurisprudence

  HB 336

Menendez, Jose(D) Relating to the use of a wireless communication device to provide evidence of motor vehicle financial responsibility.
Companions:
SB 181 Hegar, Glenn (Identical)
  3-20-13 S Voted favorably from committee as substituted Senate Transportation
Bill History: 03-04-13 H Committee action pending House Technology

  HB 372

Deshotel, Joe(D) Relating to establishing the Workplace Fraud Prevention Act.
General Remarks: To prevent contractors from wrongly classifying their workers as independent contractors (rather than as employees) in order to avoid paying unemployment taxes. Gets into the co-employment issue, which is already being policed by the IRS, among others. The difference between who is a contractor and who is an employee is not always clear, and with staff leasing arrangements becoming more common, it is becoming more difficult by the day. This bill has substantial penalties for getting it wrong, even if unintentional.
Bill History: 03-12-13 H Committee action pending House Business and Industry

  HB 448

Dukes, Dawnna(D) Relating to a requirement that the operator of an oil or gas well on which a hydraulic fracturing treatment is to be performed mail a list of the chemicals to be used in the treatment to persons residing near the well.
General Remarks: Requires the Texas Railroad Commission to adopt rules requiring the operator of a gas well on which a hydraulic fracturing (“fracking”) treatment is to be performed to notify residents living within 500 feet of the well of the same chemical components in the fracking fluid as are currently reportable to the Railroad Commission under legislation passed last session. The rule must include a process by which the well operator may withhold disclosure of one or more components that are considered trade secrets and a resident may challenge that claim.
Bill History: 03-20-13 H Committee action pending House Energy Resources

  HB 475

Walle, Amando(D) Relating to required workers’ compensation insurance coverage for building and construction contractors.
Companions:
SB 740 Rodriguez, Jose (Identical)
  2-26-13 S Introduced and referred to committee on Senate State Affairs
General Remarks: Contractors and subcontractors engaged in construction would be required to provide workers’ compensation insurance coverage for their employees. Under current law, only a contractor engaged in a public project is required to obtain workers’ compensation coverage for its employees. HB 475 would also require a subcontractor performing work on a public project to provide a certificate of insurance to the governing body of the public entity contracting for the work.Texas is virtually the only state in the nation that gives employers the option of providing workers’ compensation insurance coverage for their employees, though many employers provide coverage for injured employees through other means.
Bill History: 03-05-13 H Committee action pending House Business and Industry

  HB 487

Bell, Cecil(R) Relating to liability of certain persons assisting in hazardous or dangerous situations.
General Remarks: Provides that the governing body of a city, the chief of a fire department, or a city emergency management director or coordinator may request or accept voluntary help, including the loan or operation of heavy construction equipment from a private owner or operator, that the designated authority believes necessary to respond to a hazardous or dangerous situation. The bill applies equally to assistance requested or accepted by a county commissioners court, county fire marshal, or incorporated volunteer fire department under contract with a county, or a county emergency management director or coordinator. HB 487 extends the same immunity from civil liability to an owner or operator of heavy construction equipment in these situations as currently exists for other volunteers.
Bill History: 03-07-13 H Recommended for Local and Consent Calendar

  HB 559

Burkett, Cindy(R) Relating to the suspension of certain licenses held by employers for the knowing employment of persons not lawfully present in the United States.
General Remarks: Authorizes the Texas Workforce Commission to penalize Texas businesses for employing illegal immigrants. HB 559 by Rep. Cindy Burkett (R-Mesquite) applies to any business or individual that holds a license, certificate, registration, permit or other authorization that is issued by a licensing authority as a condition to conducting an occupation, profession, or particular business. This broad applicability covers almost any economic or business activity, some aspect of which requires a license or permit from a state agency.The legislation charges the Texas Workforce Commission with investigating complaints that a particular business has employed persons not lawfully in the United States. If the Commission finds that this is the case, it may direct the relevant licensing authority to suspend the business’s license or permit. If the business fails to remedy the problem by discharging the illegal employees, it may be liable for civil and criminal penalties.

There is a safe harbor in the proposed legislation for businesses that perform background checks on prospective employees through a federal program for verifying immigration status, or for businesses who have been given false verification information by an employee. Even so, once a complaint has been filed against an employer, it triggers an initial investigation to determine whether a contested hearing is warranted. Employers will thus be required to defend complaints that may later prove to be unfounded or based on inaccurate information. Employers subjected to the administrative process have a right to judicial review of a commission decision by trial de novo.

It is important to note that an employer may lose a license or permit as a result of an final administrative decision that might later be overturned by a court, potentially requiring the employer to reapply to the licensing authority for reinstatement or reissuance of the license or permit. In addition, criminal and civil penalties imposed on the business for operating without a required license or permit may have to be recovered in a later action against the licensing authority that levied the penalties based on the Commission’s final order. Consequently, even if an employer is ultimately exonerated from an alleged violation of the statute, it is still at risk of incurring very substantial legal costs to contest a complaint.

Bill History: 02-13-13 H Introduced and referred to committee on House State Affairs

  HB 582

Howard, Donna(D) Relating to certain restrictions on contributions and expenditures from political funds by a lobbyist.
General Remarks: Bars former legislators who become lobbyists from using their officeholder or campaign funds to make political contributions or expenditures for two years. The prohibition does not apply to a former member whose lobby activities are on behalf of non-profit organizations or groups representing low-income or disabled persons, as long as the member does not receive compensation for lobbying other than reimbursement of expenses.
Bill History: 02-14-13 H Introduced and referred to committee on House Elections

  HB 586

Workman, Paul(R) Relating to the waiver of sovereign immunity for certain claims arising under written contracts with state agencies.
Companions:
SB 296 Deuell, Bob (Identical)
  2- 5-13 S Introduced and referred to committee on Senate State Affairs
General Remarks: Waives the state’s immunity from suit under the doctrine of sovereign immunity for claims arising from a contract for goods and services in excess of $250,000. The Senate companion is SB 296 by Sen. Robert Deuell (R-Greenville).HB 586/SB 296 allows a contractor may bring suit against a state agency, including an institution of higher education, for breach of an express or implied provision in a contract. A prevailing contractor may recover the balance owed by the state under the contract, including additional amounts owed as a result of owner-caused delay or acceleration, the amount owed for charge orders or additional work, and interest. Consequential and exemplary damages, as well as those for unabsorbed home office overhead, may not be recovered.The bill provides further that contract provisions requiring arbitration or ADR proceedings prior to bringing suit are enforceable, unless they conflict with the waiver of immunity. The bill does not waive immunity in federal court or immunity for tort liability. It does not apply to employment contracts, nor does it authorize recovery of attorney’s fees unless the contract provides otherwise. Venue for an action seeking damages for breach of contract against a state agency is proper in Travis County or in the county in which the acts or omissions giving rise to the claim occurred. HB 586/SB 296 applies to claims arising under a contract executed on or after September 1, 2013.
Bill History: 02-20-13 H Introduced and referred to committee on House Judiciary and Civil Jurisprudence

  HB 615

Harless, Patricia(R) Relating to a prohibition against the knowing employment of unauthorized foreign nationals and to a biennial report regarding reported violations.
General Remarks: prohibits an employer from knowingly employing an unauthorized foreign national. The bill also bars an employer from recruiting or referring for a fee for employment an unauthorized foreign national. As proposed, the bill contains a safe harbor provision for employers who obtain documented lawful resident verification information from an employee (even if the information later turns out to be false) or who have verified the employee’s resident status through the E-Verify Program.A person with reason to believe that an employer has violated the prohibition against employing unlawful foreign nationals may file a complaint with the Texas Workforce Commission. The Commission shall compile a biennial report to the governor and legislature based on nonidentifiable, summary data compiled from complaints during the two preceding years. The report may not include information that could reasonably be expected to identify a particular employer or employee or a complaintant.

As the bill is currently drafted, the Workforce Commission has general rulemaking authority, but the bill does not contain any provisions relating to investigation, due process, or enforcement.

Bill History: 02-14-13 H Introduced and referred to committee on House State Affairs

  HB 627

Krause, Matt(R) Relating to exempting the intrastate manufacture of a firearm, a firearm accessory, or ammunition from federal regulation.
General Remarks: Declares that firearms and ammunition manufactured in Texas and not placed in interstate commerce are not subject to regulation by the federal government under the Commerce Code of the U.S. Constitution. 03-13-13 H Committee action pending Select on Federalism & Fiscal Responsibility

  HB 658

Sheets, Kenneth(R) Relating to interest on damages subject to Medicare subrogation.
General Remarks: TCJL SUPPORTS. Provides that interest does not accrue on the unpaid balance of a damages award if the U.S. Government has a right of subrogation against the award prior to the defendant’s receipt of notice of the subrogation claim from the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services. Interest is suspended for an additional 30 days after the defendant receives notice, if the defendant pays the balance of the award within that time.
Bill History: 03-25-13 H Meeting set for 2:00 P.M. OR ADJ., E2.012 House Judiciary and Civil Jurisprudence

  HB 678

Sheets, Kenneth(R) Relating to the use of a wireless communication device to provide evidence of motor vehicle financial responsibility.
General Remarks: CELL PHONE PROOF OF INSURANCE – An electronic image on a cell phone may replace paper as proof of motor vehicle financial responsibility. If enacted into law, HB 678 will allow a driver to present proof of insurance on his or her wireless communication device to law enforcement in lieu of the hard copy that never seems to be in the car when one needs it.TCJL supports this legislation.
Bill History: 03-04-13 H Committee action pending House Technology

  HB 683

Johnson, Eric(D) Relating to the election of the commissioner of education.
General Remarks: Texans would go to the polls every four years and elect the Commissioner of Insurance it w ould also change the qualifications of the commissioner so that anyone of at least 30 years of age, holds a bachelor’s degree, and has resided in Texas for at least five years immediately preceding the election. The first election for commissioner would be held in 2014 in conjunction with other major statewide offices.
Bill History: 02-18-13 H Introduced and referred to committee on House Public Education

  HB 750

Hilderbran, Harvey(R) Relating to the application of foreign laws and foreign forum selection in a proceeding involving marriage, a suit for dissolution of a marriage, or a suit affecting the parent-child relationship in this state.
Companions:
SB 285 Carona, John (Identical)
  2- 5-13 S Introduced and referred to committee on Senate Jurisprudence
General Remarks: APPLICATION OF FOREIGN LAW – Would bar a court, arbitrator, or administrative adjudicator from applying foreign law or enforcing a choice-of-law provision in a proceeding affecting the parent-child relationship or the marriage relationship, if application of the law would violate a fundamental federal or state constitutional right or one guaranteed by Texas state law. As currently drafted, the bill excludes corporations or other legal entities that submit to foreign law in their contracts. Rep. Bill Zedler (R-Arlington) has previously filed HB 288, which broadly prohibits a Texas court from basing a ruling or decision on foreign or international law.
Bill History: 02-18-13 H Introduced and referred to committee on House Judiciary and Civil Jurisprudence

  HB 880

Turner, Chris(D) Relating to liability insurance for persons holding certain alcoholic beverage permits.
General Remarks: requires a person who holds a permit to sell alcoholic beverages for on-premise consumption to carry liability insurance. The bill instructs the Texas Department of Insurance to adopt rules establishing a standard policy form and minimum limits of $500,000 for each person to whom damages under the policy are owed and $1 million per occurrence.
Bill History: 03-12-13 H Committee action pending Licensing and Administrative Procedures

  HB 881

Turner, Chris(D) Relating to the creation of a cause of action for an employee prohibited from or penalized for voting.
General Remarks: An employee could sue his or her employer for refusing to allow the employee to be absent from work for purposes of attending a polling place or for threatening or retaliating against the employee for exercising the right to vote. HB 881 would allow an employee to recover compensatory and punitive damages, reasonable attorney’s fees, and equitable relief (such as reinstatement) if a court finds that the employer engaged in discriminatory conduct. The total amount of damages an employee can recover is capped according to the size of the employer. The maximum damages recoverable for an employer with more than 500 employees, for example, would be $300,000. The bill also waives sovereign immunity to allow an employee to sue a governmental entity, although the entity would not be liable for punitive damages.
Bill History: 02-19-13 H Introduced and referred to committee on House Elections

  HB 912

Gooden, Lance(R) Relating to images captured by unmanned vehicles and aircraft.
General Remarks: DRONE IMAGES – A person whose image has been captured by an aerial drone without the person’s express consent may sue for injunctive relief and civil penalties. HB 912 applies to a person who owns or legally occupies real property and whose image is captured by an unmanned vehicle or aircraft. In addition to civil penalties, the bill also creates a criminal offense for the unauthorized capture of an image of a person who owns or legally occupies real property.The bill excepts from criminal prosecution certain law enforcement activities, such as border control, fire suppression or rescue, valid searches pursuant to a warrant, and immediate pursuit of a person law enforcement has probable cause to believe committed a crime. It also does not apply to surveillance of public property or of a public place, as long as there is no magnification or enhancement from no more than six feet above ground. The exceptions do not appear to apply to images of persons on private property incidental to such activities for purposes of the civil action.A claimant may recover $1,000 for each image captured or used, together with reasonable court costs and attorney’s fees. The consumer credit commissioner shall adjust the civil penalty each year to reflect the rate of inflation.
Bill History: 03-26-13 H Meeting set for 10:30 A.M. OR ADJ., E2.016 House Criminal Jurisprudence

  HB 930

Sheets, Kenneth(R) Relating to the effect of certain claims made under certain insurance policies.
General Remarks: Rep. Kenneth Sheets (R-Dallas) has filed legislation aimed at encouraging more private insurers to participate in the Texas homeowners insurance market. HB 930 repeals Subchapter H, Chapter 544, Texas Insurance Code, which restricts an insurer from applying standard underwriting guidelines for water damage claims. The bill also enables claims for losses caused by natural disasters to be made under a standard homeowners, fire, or farm and ranch owners policies and permits an insurer to assess premium surcharges and increase deductibles in accordance with sound actuarial principles. Finally, the bill provides that an insurer may not refuse to renew a policy unless the insured has filed two or more claims under the policy in any three-year period (current law requires three or more claims) and specifies that an insurer may refuse to renew a policy for reasons other than claims history.
Bill History: 02-19-13 H Introduced and referred to committee on House Insurance

  HB 950

Thompson, Senfronia(D) Relating to unlawful employment practices regarding discrimination in payment of compensation.
Companions:
SB 248 Davis, Wendy (Identical)
  2-20-13 S Committee action pending Senate Economic Development
General Remarks: COMPENSATION DISCRIMINATION – Specifically designates discrimination in the payment of compensation as an unlawful employment practice under Chapter 21, Labor Code, which allows employees alleging discrimination in employment to file complaints against employers and recover certain damages, including up to two years of back pay.SB 248/HB 950 provides that a violation of the Labor Code occurs each time:(1) a discriminatory compensation decision or other practice is adopted;

(2) an individual becomes subject to a discriminatory compensation decision or other practice; or

(3) an individual is adversely affected by application of a discriminatory compensation decision or other practice,including each time wages, benefits, or other compensation affected wholly or partly by such a decision or other practice is paid.

The bill further provides that liability under a back pay award may accrue, and an aggrieved person may obtain relief, including recovery of back pay for up to two years preceding the date of filing the complaint, if the unlawful employment practices that have occurred during the period for filing a complaint are similar or related to unlawful employment practices with regard to discrimination in payment of compensation that occurred outside the period for filing a complaint.

Bill History: 03-14-13 H Committee action pending House Economic and Small Business Development

  HB 1031

Lewis, Tryon(R) Relating to the confidentiality of certain communications involving an ombudsman program established by an employer as an alternative dispute resolution service.
Companions:
SB 399 Hancock, Kelly (Identical)
  3-12-13 S Committee action pending Senate Business and Commerce
General Remarks: OMBUDSMAN – Protects from discovery certain communications between an employee and a staff member of an employer’s ombudsman program. SB 399 and HB 1031 authorize an employer to establish an ombudsman program for the purpose of resolving complaints or concerns in an informal and expeditious manner. To qualify for the privilege of confidentiality under the bill, the program must be neutral, operate independently of the employer’s essential business, and maintain direct access to the employer’s senior management. An ombudsman program established under this provision may not conduct a formal investigation of the employer or receive notices of claims against the employer.The privilege covers communications between an employee and a staff member, or one between staff members, made in connection with the informal and expeditious resolution of a concern or complaint. The privilege does not apply to information that is otherwise discoverable, the disclosure of information for research or educational purposes in connection with a training or educational component of the program (as long as the identity of the parties and specific issues are shielded), or the preparation of statistical summaries that show categories of issues as long as there are a sufficient number of categories to protect the confidentiality of parties and specific issues.TCJL supports this legislation.
Bill History: 03-14-13 H Reported from committee as substituted House Judiciary and Civil Jurisprudence

  HB 1126

Anchia, Rafael(D) Relating to public financing of campaigns for appellate judicial offices; providing civil penalties.
General Remarks: Would establish a public financing system for elections to the Supreme Court, Court of Criminal Appeals, and courts of appeals. Under the proposal, a candidate could request public financing by filing a petition signed by a specified number of qualified voters who also make a minimum contribution to the candidate’s campaign. Once the Texas Ethics Commission declares that a candidate has met the eligibility standards, the candidate may start receiving distributions from the fund and may no longer accept contributions from private contributors or benefit from direct campaign expenditures on the candidate’s behalf. The fund would be composed of any amounts appropriated or gifted, as well as by civil penalties levied by the commission
Bill History: 02-20-13 H Introduced and referred to committee on House Elections

  HB 1171

Simpson, David(R) Relating to civil liability for certain damages caused by advanced meters.
General Remarks: SMART METER LIABILITY – Would impose civil liability on an electric utility or a transmission and distribution utility for personal injury, property damage, or death arising out of the use of an “advanced” or smart meter. The bill defines “property damage” to include an invasion of personal privacy and any pecuniary harm caused by the loss, misuse, or theft of customer data acquired by the use of a smart meter. In addition, a utility must allow a customer either to decline, without charge, to have a smart meter installed or, if a meter has already been installed, to have the meter removed. The utility must also notify each customer of these options
Bill History: 02-20-13 H Introduced and referred to committee on House State Affairs

  HB 1254

Thompson, Senfronia(D) Relating to transactions involving the assignment of rights in an individual’s legal claim; authorizing the imposition of a fee.
Companions:
SB 1283 Eltife, Kevin (Identical)
  3-13-13 S Introduced and referred to committee on Senate State Affairs
General Remarks: CONSUMER LAWSUIT LENDING – This is not TCJL sponsored or endorsed legislation. Representative Thompson filed this bill on behalf of the consumer lawsuit lending industry.Under legislation introduced today by Rep. Senfronia Thompson (D-Houston), entities that provide funding for consumer litigation would be subject to regulation by the Texas Department of Licensing and Regulation. HB 1254 defines a “civil justice funding company” as a person that enters into a contract with a consumer to provide non-recourse financing for the consumer’s legal claim in return for a contingent right to receive an amount of the proceeds of a settlement, judgment, award, or verdict obtained on the consumer’s behalf. A “consumer” is any individual who has a pending legal claim and who either resides in Texas or has a legal claim in Texas. The bill specifies that a civil justice funding transaction may not be considered a loan or subject to state laws governing loans (including limits on interest rates). Moreover, a civil justice funding transaction that complies with this law is not subject to any other state law governing loans or investment contracts.In order to conduct business in the state, a civil justice funding company must register with TDLR, file a bond not to exceed $50,000 (or an irrevocable letter of credit), and biennially renew its registration. The bill prohibits a funding company from: (1) paying or accepting commissions or referral fees to or from a lawyer, law firm, medical provider, chiropractor, or physical therapist (or an employee of any of them); (2) intentionally advertising materially false or misleading information about the company’s services; (3) referring a customer or potential customer to a specific attorney, law firm, medical provider, chiropractor, or physical therapist; (4) failing to promptly supply a copy of the executed contract to the consumer’s attorney; (5) knowingly providing funding to a consumer who has previously assigned or sold a portion of the consumer’s right to proceeds from a legal claim under certain circumstances; (6) making a decision relating to the conduct, settlement, or resolution of the underlying legal claim (this power must remain solely with the consumer and the attorney handling the claim); or (7) knowingly paying or offering to pay, using funds from the civil justice funding transaction, court costs, filing fees, or attorney’s fees during or after the resolution of the claim. If a court finds that a civil justice funding company has committed an intentional violation, the company may recover only the funded amount provided to the consumer without additional charges.

HB 1254 also regulates the form of a civil justice funding contract. A contract must be in writing, contain the initials of the consumer on each page, and be completed when presented to the consumer for signature. A consumer has five business days to rescind the contract without penalty. The contract must further disclose clearly and conspicuously (in at least 12-point bold type) the funded amount to be paid to the consumer, an itemization of one-time charges, the total amount to be assigned by the consumer to the company (including the funded amount and all charges), and a payment schedule that lists all dates and the amount due at the end of each 180-day period from the funding date until the due date of the maximum amount due to the company by the consumer to satisfy the contract. The contract must contain a specific notification of the consumer’s right of rescission, as well as advising the consumer to obtain the advice of an attorney before signing the contract.

The consumer’s attorney must likewise sign a written acknowledgement as part of the contract attesting: (1) to the attorney’s belief that all costs and charges relating to the funding transaction have been disclosed to the consumer; (2) that the attorney is being paid on a contingency basis under a written fee agreement; (3) that all proceeds of the legal claim will be disbursed through the attorney’s trust account or a settlement fund established to receive the proceeds of the claim on the consumer’s behalf; (4) that the attorney is following the consumer’s written instructions regarding the funding transaction; and (5) that the attorney has not received and will not receive a referral fee or other form of consideration from the funding company in connection with the transaction. If the consumer’s attorney does not complete the acknowledgement, the agreement is void.

The civil justice funding company must specify in the contract that the amount to be paid in the event the consumer recovers will be a predetermined amount based on periodic intervals between the funding date and the resolution date, and not an amount determined as a percentage of the recovery from the legal claim. A funding company has a lien on the proceeds of the consumer’s claim inferior only to the attorney’s lien, a Medicare lien, or another statutory lien related to claim.

Communications between the consumer’s attorney and the civil justice funding company pertaining to the funding transaction do not limit, waive, or abrogate the scope or nature of any applicable statutory or common law privilege, including the work-product doctrine and the attorney-client privilege.

Finally, the provisions of HB 1254 do not apply to a funding transaction between the consumer and (1) an immediate family member or (2) an attorney or accountant who provides services to the consumer. It also does not apply to a bank, lender, financing entity, or other special purpose entity that provides financing to a civil justice funding company or to which a civil justice funding company grants a security interest or transfers any rights or interest in a civil justice funding transaction.

HB 1254 would take effect September 1,2013. TDLR shall adopt rules and procedures to implement the bill by January 1, 2014.

Bill History: 03-18-13 H Committee action pending House Judiciary and Civil Jurisprudence

  HB 1325

Miller, Doug(R) Relating to the dismissal of certain actions arising from exposure to asbestos and silica.
General Remarks: ASBESTOS INACTIVE DOCKET – Certain cases pending on the asbestos MDL court’s inactive docket could be dismissed. HB 1325 provides that in an action pending on September 1, 2005 (the date the medical criteria requirements took affect) and in which the claimant has not served a report meeting the medical criteria, the MDL court must dismiss the action on motion of a defendant. The claimant may show good cause why the action should not be dismissed.HB 1325 additionally provides that in an action pending on September 1, 2005, in which the claimant does not serve a complying medical report before the later of March 1, 2014 or the 181st day after the date the action is transferred to the MDL court, the court may on its own motion dismiss the action unless a claimant shows good cause to maintain the action. Dismissal is without prejudice. If a claimant subsequently suffers an asbestos or silica-related injury, the claimant may refile the claim under the law as it existed on the date the dismissed action was filed.The bill applies to any action pending in the MDL court or referred to the court on or after September 1, 2013.

TCJL supports this legislation.

Bill History: 02-25-13 H Introduced and referred to committee on House Judiciary and Civil Jurisprudence

  HB 1407

Smithee, John(R) Relating to third-party property damage claims under private passenger automobile insurance policies.
General Remarks: PROMPT PAY AUTO CLAIMS – Requires the commissioner of insurance to adopt rules ensuring “prompt and equitable settlement of a third-party property damage claim.” The bill calls for quick settlement standards in circumstances in which the insured’s liability is reasonably clear, and the amount of the claim is within policy limits. The bill applies to any insurer that delivers, issues for delivery, or renews a Texas private passenger automobile insurance policy.Under the bill, the minimum standards must include reasonable deadlines for the insurer to acknowledge and pay a claim, the required notice the insurer must provide to the claimant or the insured, and the items, statements, and forms that an insurer may require a claimant or insured to submit in relation to the claim. An insurer is required to comply with the standards.The bill also contains provisions relating to arbitration of claims. A claimant may require an insurer to submit a dispute concerning the payment, amount, or denial of a claim to binding arbitration. A claimant who elects arbitration waives the right to bring an action against the insured or insurer (except to enforce the arbitration award), and agrees to accept payment for the claim within the policy limits. Arbitration is generally governed by Chapter 171, CPRC, though the commissioner shall adopt rules governing the procedures for requesting and conducting an arbitration, for selecting one or more arbitrators to conduct the proceeding, the qualifications of arbitrators, and procedures for the payment of the costs of arbitration. TDI must also compile and maintain a list of qualified arbitrators.

Finally, HB 1407 prohibits an insurer from delivering or renewing a Texas private passenger automobile insurance policy unless the policy or endorsement includes a provision that requires the insurer to participate in binding arbitration under the above provisions.

Bill History: 02-26-13 H Introduced and referred to committee on House Insurance

  HB 1445

Thompson, Senfronia(D) Relating to the distribution of certain civil penalties and civil restitution received by the attorney general.
Companions:
SB 635 Duncan, Robert (Identical)
  3-20-13 S Recommended for Local/Uncontested Calendar
General Remarks: LEGAL AID – requires the commissioner of insurance to adopt rules ensuring “prompt and equitable settlement of a third-party property damage claim.” The bill calls for quick settlement standards in circumstances in which the insured’s liability is reasonably clear, and the amount of the claim is within policy limits. The bill applies to any insurer that delivers, issues for delivery, or renews a Texas private passenger automobile insurance policy.Under the bill, the minimum standards must include reasonable deadlines for the insurer to acknowledge and pay a claim, the required notice the insurer must provide to the claimant or the insured, and the items, statements, and forms that an insurer may require a claimant or insured to submit in relation to the claim. An insurer is required to comply with the standards.The bill also contains provisions relating to arbitration of claims. A claimant may require an insurer to submit a dispute concerning the payment, amount, or denial of a claim to binding arbitration. A claimant who elects arbitration waives the right to bring an action against the insured or insurer (except to enforce the arbitration award) and agrees to accept payment for the claim within the policy limits. Arbitration is generally governed by Chapter 171, CPRC, though the commissioner shall adopt rules governing the procedures for requesting and conducting an arbitration, for selecting one or more arbitrators to conduct the proceeding, the qualifications of arbitrators, and procedures for the payment of the costs of arbitration. TDI must also compile and maintain a list of qualified arbitrators.

Finally, HB 1407 prohibits an insurer from delivering or renewing a Texas private passenger automobile insurance policy unless the policy or endorsement includes a provision that requires the insurer to participate in binding arbitration under the above provisions.

TCJL supports this legislation.

Bill History: 03-18-13 H Committee action pending House Judiciary and Civil Jurisprudence

  HB 1468

Sheets, Kenneth(R) Relating to confidential and privileged communications between an insurance carrier and an employer under the Texas Workers’ Compensation Act.
Companions:
SB 926 Huffman, Joan (Identical)
  3-12-13 S Introduced and referred to committee on Senate State Affairs
General Remarks: HB 1468 by Rep. Sheets and SB 926 by Sen.Huffman reverse a recent Texas Supreme Court decision holding that certain communications between a workers’ compensation carrier’s outside counsel and an employer with respect to a comp claim brought by the employer’s employee are not protected by the attorney-client privilege and may be discovered in a subsequent suit against the carrier. In In re XL Specialty Insurance Company and Cambridge Integrated Services Group, Inc. (No. 10-960, June 29, 2012), the Texas Supreme Court ruled that the attorney-client privilege (Tex.R.Evid. 503(b)) does not apply to a communication between a lawyer representing a workers’ compensation carrier and the employer regarding an administrative proceeding regarding an employee’s workers’ compensation claim, when the employee subsequently files suit against the carrier and its third party administrator for breach of the common law duty of good faith and fair dealing and violations of the Insurance code and the Texas Deceptive Trade Practices Act. Thus, the employee could discover the prior communication between the insurer’s outside counsel and the employer. HB 1468/SB 926 provide that a communication between a workers’ compensation insurance carrier and an employer, including those between the carrier’s or employer’s attorneys, sureties, consultants, employees, third-party administrators, and other agents, are confidential and privileged if the communications are: (1) in furtherance of the employer’s rights under the workers’ compensation statutes; (2) in anticipation of a judicial or administrative proceeding, including material prepared or mental impressions developed in anticipation of the proceeding; (3) for the purpose of facilitating professional services by the carrier to the employer. The bill further exempts any record of a communication privileged under the bill from the application of the Open Records Law (Chap. 552, Government Code).
Bill History: 03-26-13 H Meeting set for 1:30 P.M., E2.014 House Business and Industry

  HB 1531

King, Ken(R) Relating to the application of certain weapons laws to certain emergency services personnel licensed to carry a concealed handgun.
General Remarks: EMERGENCY PERSONNEL CHL – allows emergency services personnel in counties with a population of 50,000 or less to carry a licensed concealed handgun in the course of providing emergency services, even if the location in which the individual is providing the services otherwise bars conceal-carry. The bill defines “emergency services personnel” to include firefighters, EMS personnel, and other individuals who in the course and scope of employment or as volunteers provide services to the general public during emergency situations.
Bill History: 03-21-13 H Committee action pending House Homeland Security and Public Safety

  HB 1558

Klick, Stephanie(R) Relating to awarding attorney’s fees to an insured who prevails in an action against an insurer for uninsured or underinsured motorist coverage.
General Remarks: HB 1558 allows an insured to recover reasonable attorney’s fees in an action against an insurer arising under an uninsured or underinsured motorist policy. The bill specifically includes an action to enforce UIM coverage, if the insured is the prevailing party.
Bill History: 02-25-13 H Introduced and referred to committee on House Insurance

  HB 1595

Miller, Doug(R) Relating to the regulation of and disclosures regarding consumer lawsuit lending transactions.
Companions:
SB 927 Huffman, Joan (Identical)
  3-12-13 S Introduced and referred to committee on Senate State Affairs
General Remarks: CONSUMER LAWSUIT LENDING – Consumer lawsuit lending transactions would be subjected to Texas usury and regulatory laws in the same manner as a loan for personal, family, or household use. The bill also requires disclosure of consumer lawsuit lending transactions to the court and to an opposing party.HB 1595 defines a “consumer” as an individual who is or may become a complaining party in a dispute and to whom money is provided in a consumer lawsuit lending transaction. A “consumer lawsuit lender” is a person that provides money to a consumer, but does not include an attorney who has an attorney-client relationship with the consumer concerning the consumer’s dispute. The bill applies to any dispute, whether a civil action, ADR proceeding, or an administrative proceeding before a state agency.The bill characterizes non-recourse advances from a consumer lawsuit lender, the repayment of which is conditioned on the consumer’s recovery in the dispute, as a “loan” for purposes of Texas consumer finance laws (Chapter 342, Finance Code). This law regulates the terms, conditions, and interest that may be charged on a consumer loans and requires consumer lenders to be licensed.

In addition to the regulation of consumer lawsuit lending transactions, HB 1595 requires the plaintiff in a civil action to produce to the opposing party, without a discovery request, all documents that the plaintiff or plaintiff’s representative provided to the consumer lawsuit lender. It also requires the plaintiff to file with the court and serve on the opposing party a copy of any agreement between the plaintiff and lender. If the lending agreement is executed prior to filing the lawsuit, the information must accompany the plaintiff’s original petition. If it is executed after the action is filed, the agreement must be filed and served not later than 10 days after execution. A parallel provision applies in an alternative dispute resolution proceeding under Chapter 154, CPRC.

TCJL supports this legislation.

Bill History: 03-18-13 H Committee action pending House Judiciary and Civil Jurisprudence

  HB 1710

Raymond, Richard(D) Relating to a cost-of-living increase in compensation for district judges and longevity pay for certain judges and justices.
General Remarks: HB 1710 would allow a county commissioners court to pay each district judge with jurisdiction in the county an annual cost-of-living increase not to exceed 10% of judge’s combined salary from the state and county. The commissioners could authorize the payment if the state has not increased the state salary for district judges within the preceding three years. Payments may be discontinued if the state subsequently increases salary levels. The bill also provides that a district judge or appellate justice becomes eligible for monthly longevity pay after 10 years of service. Under current law, a judge or justice must have 16 years of service to qualify. Judges and justices serving on the effectiv e date of the bill would be eligible after ten years of service.
Bill History: 03-04-13 H Introduced and referred to committee on House Judiciary and Civil Jurisprudence

  HB 1759

Hunter, Todd(R) Relating to a correction, clarification, or retraction of incorrect information published.
Companions:
SB 1514 Ellis, Rodney (Identical)
  3-19-13 S Introduced and referred to committee on Senate State Affairs
General Remarks: Rep. Todd Hunter (R-Corpus Christi), publishers that publish timely and sufficient corrections, clarifications, or retractions of allegedly false and defamatory information would not be liable for exemplary damages in a suit for libel. HB 1759 provides that a person may only maintain an action for harm to a personal reputation caused by the false content of a publication if: (1) the person makes a timely and sufficient request for a correction, clarification, or retraction from the publisher; or (2) the defendant has made a correction, clarification, or retraction. Moreover, in order to be entitled to recover exemplary damages, the claimant must make a sufficient request for correction within 90 days after receiving knowledge of the defamatory publication. The bill specifies the contents of a sufficient request and allows the publisher to request reasonably available information regarding the alleged falsity of the defamatory statement. The information must be provided to the publisher within 30 days of the request (limitations is tolled during this period). If the claimant does not furnish the requested information and cannot show good cause why the information has not been produced, the claimant may not recover exemplary damages. Corrections, clarifications, or retractions are sufficient if published in the same or similar manner as the original publication. A defendant seeking to rely on a published correction must disclose the intention to the plaintiff within 60 days after service of the citation or within 10 days after the correction is made. A claimant must challenge the timeliness and sufficiency of a correction not later than 20 days after notice of the defendant’s intention to rely on the correction is served. A defendant may also challenge the timeliness and sufficiency of the claimant’s request for a correction, clarification, or retraction within 60 days after service of the citation. A trial judge must decide as a matter of law whether the claimant’s request for correction is timely and sufficient. If a defendant makes a timely and sufficient correction, clarification, or retraction, the claimant may not recover exemplary damages, unless the original defamatory publication was made with actual malice. Generally, neither a request for a correction nor the fact that a correction was made is admissible into evidence, except in mitigation of damages. An offer to make a correction, clarification, or retraction is likewise inadmissible at trial. HB 1759 applies to all publications, including writings, broadcasts, oral communications, electronic transmissions, or other forms of transmi tting information. The bill calls for immediate effect and would apply to any information published on or after the effective date.
Bill History: 03-04-13 H Introduced and referred to committee on House Judiciary and Civil Jurisprudence

  HB 1774

Thompson, Ed(R) Relating to liability for injury arising from certain motor vehicle accidents.
General Remarks: HB 1774 prohibits a person who fails to comply with financial responsibility requirements for a motor vehicle from recovering non-economic and exemplary damages for personal injury or property damage arising out of an accident involving an uninsured vehicle knowingly operated by the person at the time of the accident. This prohibition would not apply if the person was injured by another person: (1) who was operating a vehicle in a state of intoxication at the time of the accident; (2) who fled the scene; (3) whose wilful act or omission or gross neglect caused the injury; or (4) who, at the time of the accident, was acting in furtherance of a felony. The bill also applies to a claim of another person deriving from the uninsured motorist’s injury, including a claim for wrongful death or loss of consortium or companionship. Insurers, DPS driver’s license facilities, and persons who provide driver safety courses must all publish prescribed notices of this provision.
Bill History: 03-04-13 H Introduced and referred to committee on House Judiciary and Civil Jurisprudence

  HB 1855

Miller, Doug(R) Relating to mandatory disclosure of third-party litigation financing agreements.
General Remarks: LITIGATION HEDGE FUNDS – Rep. Doug Miller (R-New Braunfels) has filed a second bill relating to the practice of third-party litigation financing. HB 1855 directs the Texas Supreme Court to adopt rules mandating the disclosure of third-party litigation financing agreements to parties in a civil action. The rules must be adopted by December 31, 2013. HB 1595, previously filed by Rep. Miller, contains a provision directly mandating disclosure of third-party litigation agreements without a Supreme Court rulemaking.
Bill History: 03-04-13 H Introduced and referred to committee on House Judiciary and Civil Jurisprudence

  HB 1859

Crownover, Myra(R) Relating to security interests in oil and gas production and its proceeds.
Companions:
SB 1094 Hinojosa, Chuy (Identical)
  3-12-13 S Introduced and referred to committee on Senate Natural Resources
General Remarks: TEXAS OIL & GAS LIENS – To clarify the priority of liens held by oil and gas producers against the first purchaser of oil and gas production. The need for clarification arises under a Delaware bankruptcy court’s decision in In re SemCrude, 407 B.R. 112 (Bankr. D. Del 2009). The court determined that Texas oil and gas producers who sold their production to SemCrude failed to perfect their security interests because they did not file UCC-1 financing statements in Delaware and Oklahoma. Texas law (§9.343 of the Texas Uniform Commercial Code) currently provides that producer liens are automatically perfected without filing financing statements. SemCrude subsequently sold the production to subsequent purchasers and then declared bankruptcy without paying the proceeds of the sale to the producers. As unsecured creditors in bankruptcy, the producers’ claims went to the end of the line. They have subsequently filed suit in an effort to recover from the subsequent purchasers that bought and paid for the production from SemCrude.HB 1859 clarifies Texas law to give the producer automatic perfection of a security interest against the first purchaser (e.g., SemCrude), regardless of the jurisdiction in which the first purchaser is organized: (1) for oil and gas production owned by, received by, or due the first purchaser; and (2) in the identifiable proceeds of that production, if the proceeds are oil or gas production, inventory of raw, refined, or manufactured oil or gas production, or rights to or products of any of those. Automatic perfection of a security interest in oil and gas production against the first purchaser also extends to a purchase-money security interest.HB 1859 also provides that a sale of oil and gas production by a first purchaser to a subsequent purchaser cuts off the liens and security interests in the production and its proceeds. In other words, once a subsequent purchaser (e.g, a distributor, terminal, or retail seller) has bought and paid for the production from the first purchaser, the producers cannot enforce their lien against the first purchaser any further down the chain, as some are attempting to do in the SemCrude litigation. The public policy rationale for this change is simple: innocent purchasers who are not affiliated with or representative of the first purchaser should not have to pay twice for the same production. This policy is current Texas law, expressed in §9.320(a), Business & Commerce Code, which provides that a buyer in the ordinary course of business takes free of a security interest created by the buyer’s seller, even if the security interest is perfected and the buyer knows of its existence. HB 1859 affirms that, in the case of oil and gas production, Texas law does not make a bona fide subsequent purchaser for value liable for the financial condition or business dealings of the first purchaser.

HB 1859 further establishes an optional financing statement for security interests in oil and gas production and the proceeds of production. Although the sale of the production to a first purchaser automatically perfects the producer’s lien under §9.343(b), a producer may elect to file a financing statement in the jurisdiction in which the first purchaser is organized (in the SemCrude case, the jurisdiction is Delaware).

TCJL applauds Rep. Crownover for filing this important legislation to assure that both oil and gas producers and subsequent purchasers of oil and gas production have perfected and enforceable liens against a first purchaser of the production. HB 1859 will assure that the financing of oil and gas production and distribution continues on solid footing.

TCJL SUPPORTS THIS LEGISLATION

Bill History: 03-04-13 H Introduced and referred to committee on House Energy Resources

  HB 1863

Wu, Gene(D) Relating to the amounts of the administrative, civil, and criminal penalties for violating certain statutes under the jurisdiction of, rules or orders adopted by, or licenses, permits, or certificates issued by the Railroad Commission of Texas.
Companions:
SB 900 Fraser, Troy (Identical)
  3- 5-13 S Introduced and referred to committee on Senate Natural Resources
General Remarks: Texas Railroad Commission would have authority to impose higher administrative and civil penalties. SB 900 raises the current $10,000 per day penalty for a violation of a Railroad Commission order or permit related to pollution control to $25,000 per day for a violation not related to pipeline safety, and $200,000 per day for a violation related to pipeline safety. The bill also raises penalties for specific activities. For a violation of a rule or permit related to carbon dioxide or hazardous liquid pipeline, the civil penalty is increased from $50 to $25,000 for each violation and each day of violation to $500 to $200,000. It also raises the maximum criminal penalty for an offense related to hazardous pipeline safety from $25,000 to $2 million. Finally, the bill specifies similar increases in penalties for violations related to gas pipelines. SB 900 addresses deficiencies in RRC funding for pipeline monitoring and safety identified by the Sunset Advisory Commission.
Bill History: 03-20-13 H Committee action pending House Energy Resources

  HB 1869

Price, Four(R) Relating to contractual subrogation rights of certain insurers and benefit plan issuers.
Companions:
SB 1339 Duncan, Robert (Identical)
  3-13-13 S Introduced and referred to committee on Senate State Affairs
General Remarks: Addresses problems arising under the Texas Supreme Court’s decision in Fortis Benefits v. Cantu, which eliminated the “made-whole” doctrine. That doctrine held that a health insurer is not entitled to subrogation of an injured insured’s recovery of medical expenses until the insured has been made whole. Under the SCOT’s ruling in Fortis, the insurer has a right of first recovery against the insured’s settlement or judgment, even before the insured’s economic damages have been reimbursed. HB 1869 does not overturn Fortis and restore the made-whole doctrine, but it modifies the insurer’s subrogation claim by dividing the insured’s recovery between the insured and the insurer in a case in which the recovery is insufficient to fully reimburse the insured.
Bill History: 03-05-13 H Introduced and referred to committee on House Judiciary and Civil Jurisprudence

  HB 1989

Leach, Jeff(R) Relating to substituted service of citation through a social media website.
Bill History: 03-05-13 H Introduced and referred to committee on House Judiciary and Civil Jurisprudence

  HB 2082

Ritter, Allan(R) Relating to the procedure for action by the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality on applications for certain environmental permits and administrative and judicial review of the commission’s action.
Companions:
SB 957 Fraser, Troy (Identical)
  3-19-13 S Committee action pending Senate Natural Resources
General Remarks: interested persons who commented on a proposed environmental permit or participated in a public hearing on the permit application would be entitled to request an administrative review of the permit decision within 30 days of the decision. A person who did not submit comments or participate in the hearing would be limited to request review only with respect to changes in the draft rule. The review would be conducted by the State Office of Administrative Hearings. The bill requires SOAH to grant or deny the petition no later than 60 days after receiving it. If SOAH remands any or all of the permit back to the TCEQ, it must either modify or decline to modify the permit within 30 days. Judicial review is to the 3rd Court of Appeals District in Austin either under an arbitrary and capricious standard. The bill further limits the time in which the executive director must determine if an application is administratively complete to 30 days, specifies the duration of the public comment period, limits the executive director’s response to comments raised at a public hearing to matters substantially related to the permit, allows the executive director to issue a final permit in an uncontested matter, and requires the commission to issue a final permit within 30 days of receiving the ED’s draft permit.
Bill History: 03-05-13 H Introduced and referred to committee on House Environmental Regulation

  HB 2125

Taylor, Van(R) Relating to dispute resolution for certain property insurance claims.
General Remarks: a dispute between a property & casualty insurer and an insured over the amount of loss to be paid by the insurer must be referred to an appraisal process before the insured may file a civil claim against the insurer. HB 2125 requires the insured to demand an appraisal of the loss in accordance with rules adopted by the Commissioner of Insurance. A demand for appraisal tolls the applicable statute of limitations until 60 days after a decision on the appraisal is made. If an insurer demands an appraisal under the commissioner’s rules, the insurer and insured are each responsible for equal shares of the cost of the appraisal. If the insured and insurer retain different appraisers, they may agree on an “appraisal umpire” to resolve the dispute. The umpire is selected by agreement of the two appraisers; if they disagree, the Commissioner must appoint the umpire from a list of qualified persons maintained by TDI. If the insured brings a civil action contesting the appraisal decision, attorney’s fees are limited to 40% of the difference between the loss awarded by the judgment and the loss awarded by the appraisal. The remedy provided by HB 2125 is the sole, exclusive remedy for an insured in a property loss claim (other than a loss covered by a policy issued by TWIA, the Fair Plan Association, or the Texas Automobile Insurance Plan).
Bill History: 03-20-13 H Rereferred to Committee on House Insurance

  HB 2302

Hunter, Todd(R) Relating to the establishment of the statewide electronic filing system fund and to certain court fees and court costs to fund the account.
Companions:
SB 1146 West, Royce (Identical)
  3-26-13 S Meeting set for 1:30 P.M. OR ADJ., 2E.20, Senate Jurisprudence
General Remarks: A additional $15 filing fee would be imposed on civil litigants and appeals to finance the statewide electronic filing system fund. HB 2302 also adds a $5 fee for justice courts and for court costs payable on conviction for any criminal offense. The purpose of the fund is to support a statewide electronic filing technology project for state courts, provide grants to counties to implement the project, and support court technology projects that have a statewide impact.
Bill History: 03-11-13 H Introduced and referred to committee on House Judiciary and Civil Jurisprudence

  HB 2545

Miller, Doug(R) Relating to settlement credits in asbestos and silica cases.
General Remarks: ASBESTOS BANKRUPTCY TRUST DISCLOSURE/SETTLEMENT CREDIT
Bill History: 03-14-13 H Introduced and referred to committee on House Judiciary and Civil Jurisprudence

  HB 2571

Keffer, Jim(R) Relating to the inspection of certain information regarding the production, transportation, sale, and marketing of oil and gas from state land.
Bill History: 03-18-13 H Introduced and referred to committee on House Energy Resources

  HB 2592

Keffer, Jim(R) Relating to the liability of certain special-purpose districts or authorities providing water to a purchaser for the generation of electricity.
Companions:
SB 958 Fraser, Troy (Identical)
  3-25-13 S Meeting set for 9:00 A.M., Senate Chamber, Senate State Affairs
Bill History: 03-18-13 H Introduced and referred to committee on House Judiciary and Civil Jurisprudence

  HB 2748

Lewis, Tryon(R) Relating to the burden of proof in proceedings in district, statutory county court, and county courts; involving the determination of common carrier status.
General Remarks: DENBURY – Filed in response to the Texas Supreme Court’s decision in Texas Rice Land Partners Ltd. and Mike Latta v. Denbury Green Pipeline-Texas, L.L.C. In that case, the Court overturned longstanding administrative procedures used by the Railroad Commission to certify common carrier pipelines and created a constitutional cause of action against the authorized exercise of eminent domain power to acquire right-of-way for pipelines.HB 2748 provides that the Railroad Commission’s determination that an entity is a common carrier is not conclusive in a proceeding in district, statutory county court, and county courts unless the commission has made that determination after notice, a hearing, and an opportunity to appeal. The bill further provides that an appeal of the RRC’s determination of common carrier status is governed by existing law with respect to appeals of administrative decisions.

TCJL SUPPORTS THIS LEGISLATION

Bill History: 03-19-13 H Rereferred to Committee on House Judiciary and Civil Jurisprudence

  HB 2767

King, Phil(R) Relating to treating and recycling for beneficial use certain liquid or semiliquid waste arising out of or incidental to drilling for or producing oil or gas.
General Remarks: O&G WATER RECYCLING – Aimed at encouraging the recycling of oil and gas waste for beneficial use, as well as promoting conservation of water used in oil and gas operations. HB 2767 requires the Texas Railroad Commission to establish a procedure under which a person who holds a permit for on-lease operation to store, handle, treat, or reclaim oil and gas waste and who treats liquid or semiliquid oil and gas waste for a subsequent beneficial use may obtain an off-lease commercial permit. To acquire an off-lease permit, the permitee must demonstrate that it can: (1) safely store the waste and treated waste off-lease, and (2) for each site at which waste is treated, provide the commission with information about the composition of the treated oil and gas waste at that site in the form and manner prescribed by the commission.Additionally, HB 2767 provides that when liquid or semiliquid oil and gas waste is transferred to a person who takes possession of the waste for purposes of treatment for a subsequent beneficial use, the transferred material is considered to be the property of the person that takes possession until such time as the waste treated waste is transferred to another person for disposal or use. Once such transfer has occurred, the waste is considered to be the property of the transferee.Finally, HB 2767 provides that a person who takes possession of liquid or semiliquid oil and gas waste, produces from that waste a treated product generally considered in the oil and gas industry to be suitable for use in connection with the drilling for or producing of oil and gas, and transfers the treated product to another with the contractual understanding that the product will be used in connection with drilling or production is not liable in tort for a consequence of the subsequent use of the treated product by the transferee.

TCJL SUPPORTS THIS LEGISLATION

Bill History: 03-18-13 H Introduced and referred to committee on House Energy Resources

  HB 2788

Smithee, John(R) Relating to the licensing of captive insurance companies.
Companions:
SB 734 Carona, John (Identical)
  3-26-13 S Meeting set for 8:00 A.M., E1.016, Senate Business and Commerce
Bill History: 03-18-13 H Introduced and referred to committee on House Insurance

  HB 2843

Sheets, Kenneth(R) Relating to an objection of a defendant physician or health care provider to an expert report filed in a health care liability claim.
General Remarks: TCJL SUPPPORTS. Extends the time in which a claimant in a health care action must serve an expert report on the defendant to 120 days after the defendant has served an answer (current law requires service of the report within 120 days of filing the claim). The bill also extends the time for a defendant to serve an objection to the expert report to the later of 21 days after the date of the defendant’s answer or 21 days after the date the report was served.
Bill History: 03-25-13 H Meeting set for 2:00 P.M. OR ADJ., E2.012 House Judiciary and Civil Jurisprudence

  HB 2940

Toth, Steve(R) Relating to the date of the primary election and related procedures.
Companions:
SB 452 Patrick, Dan (Identical)
  2-13-13 S Introduced and referred to committee on Senate State Affairs
General Remarks: Texas would hold its primary elections a month earlier. SB 452 would move the primary from the first Tuesday in March to the first Tuesday in February. The primary runoff would likewise move up to the fourth Tuesday in April, and the deadline for filing an application for the primary ballot would occur on the second Monday in November (a little over a year before the general election). In a press release accompanying the filing of the bill, Sen. Patrick stated that the bill is intended to enhance Texas’ influence on the selection of the presidential nominees for both parties. A similar proposal in 1979 led to the notorious “Killer Bee” episode, in which 13 members of the Texas Senate broke quorum for several days late in the session to block a vote. In 1985, however, the Legislature ended up moving the primary from May to March, where it remains today.
Bill History: 03-19-13 H Introduced and referred to committee on House Elections

  HB 3032

Hernandez Luna, Ana(D) Relating to the prompt resolution of appeals in civil actions.
General Remarks: Calls for the Texas Supreme Court to adopt rules promoting the prompt, efficient, and cost-effective resolution of civil appeals. The rules must apply both to the SCOT itself and the courts of appeals. Specifically, the rules must address the need for the final disposition of an appeal not later than one year after the date a party perfects the appeal, and of an expedited and interlocutory appeal not later than three months after a party perfects the appeal. The SCOT must further adopt rules to: (1) establish a procedure to uphold, without opinion, a lower court’s judgment or order that is the subject of an appeal that the court of appeals has failed to resolve within the prescribed time period; and (2) require a court of appeals to publish or post a list of cases that have been pending with the court for six months or more on the websites of the court of appeals and the SCOT and on the front entrance of the courthouse where the court conducts proceedings. The SCOT must adopt the rules by May 1, 2014.
Bill History: 03-18-13 H Introduced and referred to committee on House Judiciary and Civil Jurisprudence

  HB 3098

Lewis, Tryon(R) Relating to the availability and use of certain evidence in connection with an award of exemplary damages.
General Remarks: Makes evidence of a defendant’s net worth privileged from discovery and inadmissible to support a claim for or the amount of punitive damages. The bill further prohibits the trier of fact from considering a defendant’s net worth for those purposes. The bill would reverse a 1988 decision by the Texas Supreme Court in Lunsford v. Morris, 746 S.W.2d 471 (Tex. 1988, orig. proceeding). TCJL supports HB 3098 on the basis that “net worth” remains a vague and ill-defined standard that is just as likely to mislead the trier of fact as inform it. As former Justice Raul Gonzalez stated in his dissent in Lunsford v. Morris, “‘I know it when I see it’ is not much of a standard.” 746 S.W.2d at 476.
Bill History: 03-19-13 H Introduced and referred to committee on House Judiciary and Civil Jurisprudence

  HB 3154

Lewis, Tryon(R) Relating to environmental or health and safety audits under the Texas Environmental, Health, and Safety Audit Privilege Act.
Companions:
SB 1300 Eltife, Kevin (Identical)
  3-13-13 S Introduced and referred to committee on Senate Natural Resources
General Remarks: SB 1300 by Sen. Kevin Eltife (R-Tyler) and its companion, HB 3154 amend the Texas Environmental, Health, and Safety Privilege Act (Art. 4447cc, VTCS) to protect a person that acquires a regulated facility or operation from liability for civil or administrative penalties for up to six months after the acquisition closing date under certain circumstances. Under existing law, a regulated facility or operation may conduct a systematic voluntary self-evaluation, review, or assessment of compliance with environmental or health safety laws or of any permit issued under those laws. Audit findings may be reported under confidentiality to certain parties and the state for purposes of addressing or correcting a matter raised by the audit, provided that the regulated facility gives notice to the appropriate regulatory agency of the audit. SB 1300/HB 3154 extend the privilege for up to six months after a purchaser acquires the facility, as long as the purchaser completes an ongoing audit within that time (unless the regulatory authority extends the time based on reasonable grounds). The bill further authorizes a prospective purchaser of a regulated facility to perform a privileged audit prior to acquiring the facility as part of the purchaser’s investigation of whether to complete the purchase. The purchaser is shielded from an administrative or civil penalty for a violation voluntarily disclosed to the regulatory agency if: (1) for a violation discovered after the acquisition date, the purchaser commenced the audit prior to the acquisition date and notified the regulatory agency of the fact that an audit was being conducted within 45 days after the acquisition date; and (2) for a violation discovered before the acquisition date, the disclosure is made within 45 days after the closing date. If the violation is discovered in the course of an audit before the acquisition date by either the regulated facility or the acquiring person, the acquiring person may claim the immunity if: (1) the person discovering the violation was not responsible for compliance at the regulated facility with the applicable law violated; (2) the discovering person was not the person with the largest ownership share of the seller; (2) the seller was not the person with the largest ownership share of the person; and (4) the person and seller did not have a common corporate parent or common majority interest owner. SB 1300 has been referred to Senate Natural Resources. HB 3154 has not yet been referred to committee.
Bill History: 03-19-13 H Introduced and referred to committee on House Environmental Regulation

  HB 3310

Walle, Amando(D) Relating to requirements for employers who do not obtain workers’ compensation insurance coverage under the Texas Workers’ Compensation Act.
Companions:
SB 1020 Ellis, Rodney (Identical)
  3-12-13 S Introduced and referred to committee on Senate State Affairs
General Remarks: Requires an employer that does not obtain workers’ compensation insurance to purchase a life insurance policy for each employee. The policy must have a death benefit of at least $200,000, and the employer may not be the beneficiary. Acceptance of a death benefit does not affect the right of a person to sue the employer. An employer who fails to comply with the requirement is subject to administrative sanctions.
Bill History: 03-19-13 H Introduced and referred to committee on House Business and Industry

  HB 3404

Raymond, Richard(D) Relating to limits on certain actions arising out of attorney’s fee agreements and litigation expense agreements.
General Remarks: HB 3404 would limit certain actions relating to attorney’s fee and litigation expense agreements in which the fee is contingent on the outcome of the litigation. The bill sets out certain critieria that an attorney’s fee, litigation expense, or settlement agreement must meet in order to qualify for this limitation. Specifically, a party to such an agreement may bring an action on a claim arising out of a settlement agreement or a representation that is the subject of the agreement only if the settlement agreement was obtained by corruption, coercion, or force, or if the agreement was forged. Additionally, in an action to invalidate a settlement agreement that meets the requirements of the bill, the settlement is irrebuttably presumed to be: (1) fully disclosed, read, understood, and voluntarily entered into by all parties to the agreement; (2) fair, accepted, reasonable, and made in the best interests of the parties by the parties or through their attorneys; and (3) final and not subject to subsequent litigation. A court shall dismiss with prejudice an action on a claim arising from a settlement agreement if the action is brought on grounds other than those specified in the bill.
Bill History: 03-19-13 H Introduced and referred to committee on House Judiciary and Civil Jurisprudence

  HB 3476

Paddie, Chris(R) Relating to the liability of sports officials and organizations.
General Remarks: a sports official cannot be held liable for civil damages, including personal injury, wrongful death, property damage, or other loss related to an act, error, or omission resulting from a risk inherent in a competitive sports activity. HB 3476 provides that an official may still be liable for gross negligence or wanton, wilful, or intentional conduct. Whether a risk is inherent depends on the nature of the sport in question, the conduct that is generally accepted in the sport, and whether the harm occurred during the pursuit of the purposes of the competition. The bill also specifies that a mere violation of the rules of play or failing to call a penalty, missing a call, or failing to enforce competition rules cannot in itself give rise to liability. “Sport” is broadly defined to include any competitive group or solo activity involving any aspect of physical competition, coordination, endurance, or stamina. A “sports official” includes any person who officiates, judges, or enforces contest rules in an official capacity with respect to an interscholastic, intercollegiate, or other organized amateur or professional athletic competition. The bill further protects a sponsoring organization of an athletic competition from liability for an act, error, or omission of a sports official, unless a new, independent, and separate act, error, or omission of the organization gives rise to the harm.
Bill History: 03-20-13 H Introduced and referred to committee on House Judiciary and Civil Jurisprudence

  HB 3547

Oliveira, Rene(D) Relating to standards and procedures for determining whether a person who owns, operates, or manages a pipeline is a common carrier.
General Remarks: HB 3547 by Rep. Rene Oliveira (D-Brownsville), Chair of the House Business & Industry Committee, would prohibit a person who owns, operates, or manages a pipeline from exercising the power of eminent domain to construct a pipeline without a determination from the State Office of Administrative Hearings (SOAH) that the person is a common carrier. The bill defines “common carrier” to exclude a pipeline owner, operator, or manager unless at least 10 percent of the pipeline’s capacity is used or is reasonably likely to be used to transport substances for one or more unaffiliated persons. To obtain a determination of common carrier status, the pipeline must apply to the Railroad Commission and SOAH. SOAH must conduct one or more hearings under the contested case procedure in the Administrative Procedures Act (Chap. 2001, Government Code). If requested, at least one hearing shall be open to the public and held in the county where the pipeline will be located. SOAH has the discretion to have additional hearings in other affected counties. The introduced version of the bill does not specify whether judicial review of SOAH’s decision is by trial de novo or substantial evidence.
Bill History: 03-20-13 H Introduced and referred to committee on House Energy Resources

  SB 11

Nelson, Jane(R) Relating to the administration and operation of the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) program.
Bill History: 03-26-13 S Meeting set for 9:00 A.M., Senate Chamber Senate Health and Human Services

  SB 181

Hegar, Glenn(R) Relating to the use of a wireless communication device to provide evidence of motor vehicle financial responsibility.
Companions:
HB 336 Menendez, Jose (Identical)
  3- 4-13 H Committee action pending House Technology
Bill History: 03-20-13 S Voted favorably from committee as substituted Senate Transportation

  SB 248

Davis, Wendy(D) Relating to unlawful employment practices regarding discrimination in payment of compensation.
Companions:
HB 950 Thompson, Senfronia (Identical)
  3-14-13 H Committee action pending House Economic and Small Business Development
General Remarks: COMPENSATION DISCRIMINATION – Specifically designates discrimination in the payment of compensation as an unlawful employment practice under Chapter 21, Labor Code, which allows employees alleging discrimination in employment to file complaints against employers and recover certain damages, including up to two years of back pay.SB 248/HB 950 provides that a violation of the Labor Code occurs each time:(1) a discriminatory compensation decision or other practice is adopted;

(2) an individual becomes subject to a discriminatory compensation decision or other practice; or

(3) an individual is adversely affected by application of a discriminatory compensation decision or other practice,including each time wages, benefits, or other compensation affected wholly or partly by such a decision or other practice is paid.

The bill further provides that liability under a back pay award may accrue, and an aggrieved person may obtain relief, including recovery of back pay for up to two years preceding the date of filing the complaint, if the unlawful employment practices that have occurred during the period for filing a complaint are similar or related to unlawful employment practices with regard to discrimination in payment of compensation that occurred outside the period for filing a complaint.

Bill History: 02-20-13 S Committee action pending Senate Economic Development

  SB 285

Carona, John(R) Relating to the application of foreign laws and foreign forum selection in a proceeding involving marriage, a suit for dissolution of a marriage, or a suit affecting the parent-child relationship in this state.
Companions:
HB 750 Hilderbran, Harvey (Identical)
  2-18-13 H Introduced and referred to committee on House Judiciary and Civil Jurisprudence
General Remarks: Remarks copied from: TX83RHB 750 (03-08-2013 – 15:11:24)APPLICATION OF FOREIGN LAW – Would bar a court, arbitrator, or administrative adjudicator from applying foreign law or enforcing a choice-of-law provision in a proceeding affecting the parent-child relationship or the marriage relationship, if application of the law would violate a fundamental federal or state constitutional right or one guaranteed by Texas state law. As currently drafted, the bill excludes corporations or other legal entities that submit to foreign law in their contracts. Rep. Bill Zedler (R-Arlington) has previously filed HB 288, which broadly prohibits a Texas court from basing a ruling or decision on foreign or international law.
Bill History: 02-05-13 S Introduced and referred to committee on Senate Jurisprudence

  SB 296

Deuell, Bob(R) Relating to the waiver of sovereign immunity for certain claims arising under written contracts with state agencies.
Companions:
HB 586 Workman, Paul (Identical)
  2-20-13 H Introduced and referred to committee on House Judiciary and Civil Jurisprudence
General Remarks: HB 586/SB 296 allows a contractor may bring suit against a state agency, including an institution of higher education, for breach of an express or implied provision in a contract. A prevailing contractor may recover the balance owed by the state under the contract, including additional amounts owed as a result of owner-caused delay or acceleration, the amount owed for charge orders or additional work, and interest. Consequential and exemplary damages, as well as those for unabsorbed home office overhead, may not be recovered. The bill provides further that contract provisions requiring arbitration or ADR proceedings prior to bringing suit are enforceable, unless they conflict with the waiver of immunity. The bill does not waive immunity in federal court or immunity for tort liability. It does not apply to employment contracts, nor does it authorize recovery of attorney’s fees unless the contract provides otherwise. Venue for an action seeking damages for breach of contract against a state agency is proper in Travis County or in the county in which the acts or omissions giving rise to the claim occurred. HB 586/SB 296 applies to claims arising under a contract executed on or after September 1, 2013.
Bill History: 02-05-13 S Introduced and referred to committee on Senate State Affairs

  SB 399

Hancock, Kelly(R) Relating to the confidentiality of certain communications involving an ombudsman program established by an employer as an alternative dispute resolution service.
Companions:
HB 1031 Lewis, Tryon (Identical)
  3-14-13 H Reported from committee as substituted House Judiciary and Civil Jurisprudence
General Remarks: OMBUDSMAN – Protects from discovery certain communications between an employee and a staff member of an employer’s ombudsman program. SB 399 and HB 1031 authorize an employer to establish an ombudsman program for the purpose of resolving complaints or concerns in an informal and expeditious manner. To qualify for the privilege of confidentiality under the bill, the program must be neutral, operate independently of the employer’s essential business, and maintain direct access to the employer’s senior management. An ombudsman program established under this provision may not conduct a formal investigation of the employer or receive notices of claims against the employer.The privilege covers communications between an employee and a staff member, or one between staff members, made in connection with the informal and expeditious resolution of a concern or complaint. The privilege does not apply to information that is otherwise discoverable, the disclosure of information for research or educational purposes in connection with a training or educational component of the program (as long as the identity of the parties and specific issues are shielded), or the preparation of statistical summaries that show categories of issues as long as there are a sufficient number of categories to protect the confidentiality of parties and specific issues.TCJL supports this legislation.
Bill History: 03-12-13 S Committee action pending Senate Business and Commerce

  SB 452

Patrick, Dan(R) Relating to the date of the primary election and related procedures.
Companions:
HB 2940 Toth, Steve (Identical)
  3-19-13 H Introduced and referred to committee on House Elections
General Remarks: Texas would hold its primary elections a month earlier. SB 452 would move the primary from the first Tuesday in March to the first Tuesday in February. The primary runoff would likewise move up to the fourth Tuesday in April, and the deadline for filing an application for the primary ballot would occur on the second Monday in November (a little over a year before the general election). In a press release accompanying the filing of the bill, Sen. Patrick stated that the bill is intended to enhance Texas’ influence on the selection of the presidential nominees for both parties. A similar proposal in 1979 led to the notorious “Killer Bee” episode, in which 13 members of the Texas Senate broke quorum for several days late in the session to block a vote. In 1985, however, the Legislature ended up moving the primary from May to March, where it remains today.
Bill History: 02-13-13 S Introduced and referred to committee on Senate State Affairs

  SB 522

Estes, Craig(R) Relating to contested cases held under the Administrative Procedure Act.
General Remarks: Proposes significant reforms to the procedures for conducting contested cases before state agencies. Here is a brief summary of the main provisions of the bill: Notice: The bill requires the contents of a notice of hearing to state specifically the factual matters asserted and allows a party to request a detailed statement of the facts, which must be delivered not less than 10 days prior to the hearing date (current law is 3 days, with no detailed statement of factual matters). In a suit for judicial review, the failure of an agency to provide the factual statement constitutes substantial prejudice to the rights of the appellant. Licenses: The bill allows a licensing agency to summarily suspend a license pending proceedings for revocation or other action, if it finds that an imminent peril to the public health, safety, or welfare imperatively requires emergency action. An order for summary suspension must incorporate a factual and legal basis establishing the imminent peril standard. Such an order is final and immediately appealable to Travis County district court. Failure to provide the required information in the order constitutes substantial prejudice to the rights of the license holder. Final Decisions: The bill specifies that a final decision of an agency adverse to any party must be signed by a person authorized by law to sign the agency decision. If a party has submitted proposed conclusions of law in addition to proposed findings of fact, the decision must include a ruling on each proposed conclusion. The bill further mandates that the agency shall notify each party of its decision by certified or registered mail or by electronic means. The agency must keep a record documenting the provision and receipt of the notice. If an adversely affected party does not receive timely notice, any time period relating to the decision or a motion for rehearing does not begin to run until the party receives the notice or acquires actual knowledge of the signed decision or rehearing order. To establish a revised time period, the adversely affected party must prove, on sworn motion and notice, that the date the party received notice or acquired actual knowledge was more than 14 days after the decision or order was signed. Time of Decision: An agency decision must be signed not later than 60 days after the date the hearing is finally closed, subject to extension by the agency or person who conducts the hearing. The bill also specifies that a decision in a contested case is final when a decision or order overruling a motion for rehearing is signed. Motions for Rehearing: A motion for rehearing must be served on all parties to the contested case in accordance with Rule 21a, TRCP, not later than 20 days after the date on which the decision is signed. A reply to the motion is due not later than 30 days after the date the decision is signed, or not later than 10 days after the motion for rehearing is filed if the time for filing the motion for rehearing has been extended by agreement or written agency order. The agency must act on the motion no later than 45 days after the decision is signed or the motion is overruled by operation of law. This time may be extended by the agency on its own motion or on the motion of any party. A motion for rehearing must specify the findings of fact or conclusions of law complained of and any evidentiary or legal ruling claimed to be erroneous. It must also specify the legal and factual basis for the claimed error. After the agency rules on the motion for rehearing, a further motion must be filed not later than 20 days after the ruling is signed, if the order modifies in any respect the original decision, even if the modification does not change the outcome of the case or makes only typographical, grammatical, or immaterial changes, or if the order vacates the original decision and issues a new decision. Judicial Review: Current law mandates that judicial review be initiated by filing a petition not later than 30 days after the agency decision is final and appealable. The bill adds that a prematurely filed petition is effective to initiate judicial review and deemed filed on the day of, but after, the event that begins the period for filing a petition. SB 522 would take effect September 1, 2013.
Bill History: 02-20-13 S Introduced and referred to committee on Senate State Affairs

  SB 635

Duncan, Robert(R) Relating to the distribution of certain civil penalties and civil restitution received by the attorney general.
Companions:
HB 1445 Thompson, Senfronia (Identical)
  3-18-13 H Committee action pending House Judiciary and Civil Jurisprudence
General Remarks: LEGAL AID – requires the commissioner of insurance to adopt rules ensuring “prompt and equitable settlement of a third-party property damage claim.” The bill calls for quick settlement standards in circumstances in which the insured’s liability is reasonably clear, and the amount of the claim is within policy limits. The bill applies to any insurer that delivers, issues for delivery, or renews a Texas private passenger automobile insurance policy.Under the bill, the minimum standards must include reasonable deadlines for the insurer to acknowledge and pay a claim, the required notice the insurer must provide to the claimant or the insured, and the items, statements, and forms that an insurer may require a claimant or insured to submit in relation to the claim. An insurer is required to comply with the standards.The bill also contains provisions relating to arbitration of claims. A claimant may require an insurer to submit a dispute concerning the payment, amount, or denial of a claim to binding arbitration. A claimant who elects arbitration waives the right to bring an action against the insured or insurer (except to enforce the arbitration award) and agrees to accept payment for the claim within the policy limits. Arbitration is generally governed by Chapter 171, CPRC, though the commissioner shall adopt rules governing the procedures for requesting and conducting an arbitration, for selecting one or more arbitrators to conduct the proceeding, the qualifications of arbitrators, and procedures for the payment of the costs of arbitration. TDI must also compile and maintain a list of qualified arbitrators.

Finally, HB 1407 prohibits an insurer from delivering or renewing a Texas private passenger automobile insurance policy unless the policy or endorsement includes a provision that requires the insurer to participate in binding arbitration under the above provisions.

TCJL supports this legislation.

Bill History: 03-20-13 S Recommended for Local/Uncontested Calendar

  SB 679

Duncan, Robert(R) Relating to evidence in a civil action concerning the provision and cost of certain services.
General Remarks: TCJL SUPPORTS. Makes technical changes to Sections 18.001(b) and (d), TCPRC, which governs the necessary records and affidavits relating to medical expenses in a civil action. The bill seeks to streamline the process and reduce the burden of filing often lengthy medical expense records with the clerk of the court. CSSB 679 provides that unless the Texas Rules of Evidence specify otherwise, the records attached to an affidavit proving up medical expenses need not be filed with the clerk of the court before the trial commences, though they are served on the opposing party. The bill also adds language to §18.002 to provide that a supporting affidavit from the custodian of medical expense records is sufficient if it substantially complies with the form set out in the statute. The affidavit essentially states the total amount paid for the serve and the amount currently unpaid but which the medical provider has a right to be paid after any adjustments or credits. Finally, the bill clarifies that if a medical bill or other itemized statement attached to the affidavit reflects a charge that is not recoverable, the reference to that charge is not admissible at trial.
Bill History: 03-25-13 S Meeting set for 9:00 A.M., Senate Chamber Senate State Affairs

  SB 734

Carona, John(R) Relating to the licensing of captive insurance companies.
Companions:
HB 2788 Smithee, John (Identical)
  3-18-13 H Introduced and referred to committee on House Insurance
Bill History: 03-26-13 S Meeting set for 8:00 A.M., E1.016 Senate Business and Commerce

  SB 740

Rodriguez, Jose(D) Relating to required workers’ compensation insurance coverage for building and construction contractors.
Companions:
HB 475 Walle, Amando (Identical)
  3- 5-13 H Committee action pending House Business and Industry
General Remarks: Under proposed legislation filed by Rep. Armando Walle (D-Houston), contractors and subcontractors engaged in construction would be required to provide workers’ compensation insurance coverage for their employees. Under current law, only a contractor engaged in a public project is required to obtain workers’ compensation coverage for its employees. HB 475 would also require a subcontractor performing work on a public project to provide a certificate of insurance to the governing body of the public entity contracting for the work. Texas is virtually the only state in the nation that gives employers the option of providing workers’ compensation insurance coverage for their employees, though many employers provide coverage for injured employees through other means.
Bill History: 02-26-13 S Introduced and referred to committee on Senate State Affairs

  SB 746

Nelson, Jane(R) Relating to unlawful acts against and criminal offenses involving the Medicaid program. *SL.
Bill History: 03-13-13 S Reported from committee as substituted Senate Health and Human Services

  SB 900

Fraser, Troy(R) Relating to the amounts of the administrative, civil, and criminal penalties for violating certain statutes under the jurisdiction of, rules or orders adopted by, or licenses, permits, or certificates issued by the Railroad Commission of Texas.
Companions:
HB 1863 Wu, Gene (Identical)
  3-20-13 H Committee action pending House Energy Resources
General Remarks: Texas Railroad Commission would have authority to impose higher administrative and civil penalties. SB 900 raises the current $10,000 per day penalty for a violation of a Railroad Commission order or permit related to pollution control to $25,000 per day for a violation not related to pipeline safety, and $200,000 per day for a violation related to pipeline safety.The bill also raises penalties for specific activities. For a violation of a rule or permit related to carbon dioxide or hazardous liquid pipeline, the civil penalty is increased from $50 to $25,000 for each violation and each day of violation to $500 to $200,000. It also raises the maximum criminal penalty for an offense related to hazardous pipeline safety from $25,000 to $2 million. Finally, the bill specifies similar increases in penalties for violations related to gas pipelines. SB 900 addresses deficiencies in RRC funding for pipeline monitoring and safety identified by the Sunset Advisory Commission.
Bill History: 03-05-13 S Introduced and referred to committee on Senate Natural Resources

  SB 926

Huffman, Joan(R) Relating to confidential and privileged communications between an insurance carrier and an employer under the Texas Workers’ Compensation Act.
Companions:
HB 1468 Sheets, Kenneth (Identical)
  3-26-13 H Meeting set for 1:30 P.M., E2.014, House Business and Industry
General Remarks: Remarks copied from: TX83RHB 1468 (03-21-2013 – 10:04:16)HB 1468 by Rep. Sheets and SB 926 by Sen.Huffman reverse a recent Texas Supreme Court decision holding that certain communications between a workers’ compensation carrier’s outside counsel and an employer with respect to a comp claim brought by the employer’s employee are not protected by the attorney-client privilege and may be discovered in a subsequent suit against the carrier. In In re XL Specialty Insurance Company and Cambridge Integrated Services Group, Inc. (No. 10-960, June 29, 2012), the Texas Supreme Court ruled that the attorney-client privilege (Tex.R.Evid. 503(b)) does not apply to a communication between a lawyer representing a workers’ compensation carrier and the employer regarding an administrative proceeding regarding an employee’s workers’ compensation claim, when the employee subsequently files suit against the carrier and its third party administrator for breach of the common law duty of good faith and fair dealing and violations of the Insurance code and the Texas Deceptive Trade Practices Act. Thus, the employee could discover the prior communication between the insurer’s outside counsel and the employer. HB 1468/SB 926 provide that a communication between a workers’ compensation insurance carrier and an employer, including those between the carrier’s or employer’s attorneys, sureties, consultants, employees, third-party administrators, and other agents, are confidential and privileged if the communications are: (1) in furtherance of the employer’s rights under the workers’ compensation statutes; (2) in anticipation of a judicial or administrative proceeding, including material prepared or mental impressions developed in anticipation of the proceeding; (3) for the purpose of facilitating professional services by the carrier to the employer. The bill further exempts any record of a communication privileged under the bill from the application of the Open Records Law (Chap. 552, Government Code).
Bill History: 03-12-13 S Introduced and referred to committee on Senate State Affairs

  SB 927

Huffman, Joan(R) Relating to the regulation of and disclosures regarding consumer lawsuit lending transactions.
Companions:
HB 1595 Miller, Doug (Identical)
  3-18-13 H Committee action pending House Judiciary and Civil Jurisprudence
General Remarks: CONSUMER LAWSUIT LENDING Consumer lawsuit lending transactions would be subjected to Texas usury and regulatory laws in the same manner as a loan for personal, family, or household use. The bill also requires disclosure of consumer lawsuit lending transactions to the court and to an opposing party.HB 1595 defines a “consumer” as an individual who is or may become a complaining party in a dispute and to whom money is provided in a consumer lawsuit lending transaction. A “consumer lawsuit lender” is a person that provides money to a consumer, but does not include an attorney who has an attorney-client relationship with the consumer concerning the consumer’s dispute. The bill applies to any dispute, whether a civil action, ADR proceeding, or an administrative proceeding before a state agency.The bill characterizes non-recourse advances from a consumer lawsuit lender, the repayment of which is conditioned on the consumer’s recovery in the dispute, as a “loan” for purposes of Texas consumer finance laws (Chapter 342, Finance Code). This law regulates the terms, conditions, and interest that may be charged on a consumer loans and requires consumer lenders to be licensed.

In addition to the regulation of consumer lawsuit lending transactions, HB 1595 requires the plaintiff in a civil action to produce to the opposing party, without a discovery request, all documents that the plaintiff or plaintiff’s representative provided to the consumer lawsuit lender. It also requires the plaintiff to file with the court and serve on the opposing party a copy of any agreement between the plaintiff and lender. If the lending agreement is executed prior to filing the lawsuit, the information must accompany the plaintiff’s original petition. If it is executed after the action is filed, the agreement must be filed and served not later than 10 days after execution. A parallel provision applies in an alternative dispute resolution proceeding under Chapter 154, CPRC.

TCJL supports this legislation.

Bill History: 03-12-13 S Introduced and referred to committee on Senate State Affairs

  SB 957

Fraser, Troy(R) Relating to the procedure for action by the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality on applications for certain environmental permits and administrative and judicial review of the commission’s action.
Companions:
HB 2082 Ritter, Allan (Identical)
  3- 5-13 H Introduced and referred to committee on House Environmental Regulation
General Remarks: Legislation filed by Rep. Allan Ritter (R-Nederland) and Sen. Troy Fraser (R-Horseshoe Bay), would streamline TCEQ’s environmental permitting process. Under HB 2082 and SB 957, interested persons who commented on a proposed environmental permit or participated in a public hearing on the permit application would be entitled to request an administrative review of the permit decision within 30 days of the decision. A person who did not submit comments or participate in the hearing would be limited to request review only with respect to changes in the draft rule. The review would be conducted by the State Office of Administrative Hearings. The bill requires SOAH to grant or deny the petition no later than 60 days after receiving it. If SOAH remands any or all of the permit back to the TCEQ, it must either modify or decline to modify the permit within 30 days. Judicial review is to the 3rd Court of Appeals District in Austin either under an arbitrary and capricious standard. The bill further limits the time in which the executive director must determine if an application is administratively complete to 30 days, specifies the duration of the public comment period, limits the executive director’s response to comments raised at a public hearing to matters substantially related to the permit, allows the executive director to issue a final permit in an uncontested matter, and requires the commission to issue a final permit within 30 days of receiving the ED’s draft permit.
Bill History: 03-19-13 S Committee action pending Senate Natural Resources

  SB 1020

Ellis, Rodney(D) Relating to requirements for employers who do not obtain workers’ compensation insurance coverage under the Texas Workers’ Compensation Act.
Companions:
HB 3310 Walle, Amando (Identical)
  3-19-13 H Introduced and referred to committee on House Business and Industry
General Remarks: Requires an employer that does not obtain workers’ compensation insurance to purchase a life insurance policy for each employee. The policy must have a death benefit of at least $200,000, and the employer may not be the beneficiary. Acceptance of a death benefit does not affect the right of a person to sue the employer. An employer who fails to comply with the requirement is subject to administrative sanctions.
Bill History: 03-12-13 S Introduced and referred to committee on Senate State Affairs

  SB 1049

Van de Putte, Leticia(D) Relating to unfair settlement practices with respect to workers’ compensation insurance claims.
General Remarks: SB 1049 by Rep. Leticia Van de Putte (D-San Antonio) applies the unfair settlement practices statute, §540.060, Insurance Code, to a claim by an insured or a beneficiary under a workers’ compensation insurance policy. SB 1049 appears to respond to the Texas Supreme Court’s decision in Texas Mutual Insurance Company v. Ruttiger (No. 08-0751; June 22, 2012). In a 5-4 decision, the Court overruled Aranda v. Insurance Co. of North America, 748 S. W.2d 210 (Tex. 1988), which recognized a common law cause of action for breach of the duty of good faith and fair dealing against workers’ compensation carriers. The Court closely examined the 1989 and subsequent reforms to the Texas Workers’ Compensation Act and concluded that the detailed notice and administrative dispute resolution provisions of the Act demonstrate legislative intent “for there to be no alternative remedies,” either under Chapters 541 and 542, Insurance Code, the Texas Deceptive Trade Practices Act, or the common law. The lack of an effective and exclusive remedy prior to 1989 may have justified the Aranda court’s recognition of a common law bad faith claim against a workers’ compensation carrier, but the current system does not. Continuing to recognize a common law cause of action against the carrier would undercut the Legislature’s administrative process, encourage the injured employee to delay the speedy resolution of a comp claim, and penalize the carrier for otherwise complying with the notice and appeals process provided by the Act. It would also increase litigation expense to employees, insurers, and employers in direct contravention of the Legislature’s intention to reduce those costs.
Bill History: 03-12-13 S Introduced and referred to committee on Senate State Affairs

  SB 1094

Hinojosa, Chuy(D) Relating to security interests in oil and gas production and its proceeds.
Companions:
HB 1859 Crownover, Myra (Identical)
  3- 4-13 H Introduced and referred to committee on House Energy Resources
General Remarks: Sen. Juan Hinojosa (D-McAllen) has filed SB 1094, the Senate companion to HB 1859, which clarifies Texas law with respect to the perfection of oil and gas liens against a first purchaser of the production. TCJL Supports
Bill History: 03-12-13 S Introduced and referred to committee on Senate Natural Resources

  SB 1146

West, Royce(D) Relating to the establishment of the statewide electronic filing system fund and to certain court fees and court costs to fund the account.
Companions:
HB 2302 Hunter, Todd (Identical)
  3-11-13 H Introduced and referred to committee on House Judiciary and Civil Jurisprudence
General Remarks: The Senate Jurisprudence Committee, chaired by Sen. Royce West (D-Dallas), has scheduled SB 1146 and SB 1147 for hearing on Tuesday, March 13. Authored by Chairman West, these bills would establish and finance a statewide electronic filing system for trial and appellate courts. TCJL strongly supports these bills as critical to making the Texas judicial system more efficient and cost-effective. The hearing will be held Tuesday at 1:30 or on adjournment of the Senate in 2E.20. If you can, please drop by a register in support of both SB 1146 and SB 1147.
Bill History: 03-26-13 S Meeting set for 1:30 P.M. OR ADJ., 2E.20 Senate Jurisprudence

  SB 1147

West, Royce(D) Relating to the electronic filing system established by rule or order of the Texas Supreme Court.
General Remarks: The Senate Jurisprudence Committee, chaired by Sen. Royce West (D-Dallas), has scheduled SB 1146 and SB 1147 for hearing on Tuesday, March 13. Authored by Chairman West, these bills would establish and finance a statewide electronic filing system for trial and appellate courts. TCJL strongly supports these bills as critical to making the Texas judicial system more efficient and cost-effective. The hearing will be held Tuesday at 1:30 or on adjournment of the Senate in 2E.20. If you can, please drop by a register in support of both SB 1146 and SB 1147.
Bill History: 03-26-13 S Meeting set for 1:30 P.M. OR ADJ., 2E.20 Senate Jurisprudence

  SB 1166

Hegar, Glenn(R) Relating to certain procedures and civil penalties under the Deceptive Trade Practices-Consumer Protection Act.
General Remarks: Changes the amount of the civil penalty that may be paid to the state in an action brought by the Consumer Protection Division of the Attorney General’s Office under the Deceptive Trade Practices Act. Current law, §17.47(c), Business & Commerce Code, provides that the trier of fact may award a penalty of not more than $20,000 per violation, and if the violation involved a consumer of 65 years of age or older, an additional $250,000. SB 1166 provides that the minimum amount of the penalty shall be not more than $10,000, not to exceed ten times the amount of actual damages awarded by the trier of fact, or not more than $20,000 per violation, as determined by the trier of fact if the person intentionally committed the violation.
Bill History: 03-12-13 S Introduced and referred to committee on Senate State Affairs

  SB 1283

Eltife, Kevin(R) Relating to transactions involving the assignment of rights in an individual’s legal claim.
Companions:
HB 1254 Thompson, Senfronia (Identical)
  3-18-13 H Committee action pending House Judiciary and Civil Jurisprudence
General Remarks: Remarks copied from: TX83RHB 1254 (03-21-2013 – 10:08:23) CONSUMER LAWSUIT LENDING – This is not TCJL sponsored or endorsed legislation. Representative Thompson filed this bill on behalf of the consumer lawsuit lending industry.Under legislation introduced today by Rep. Senfronia Thompson (D-Houston), entities that provide funding for consumer litigation would be subject to regulation by the Texas Department of Licensing and Regulation. HB 1254 defines a “civil justice funding company” as a person that enters into a contract with a consumer to provide non-recourse financing for the consumer’s legal claim in return for a contingent right to receive an amount of the proceeds of a settlement, judgment, award, or verdict obtained on the consumer’s behalf. A “consumer” is any individual who has a pending legal claim and who either resides in Texas or has a legal claim in Texas. The bill specifies that a civil justice funding transaction may not be considered a loan or subject to state laws governing loans (including limits on interest rates). Moreover, a civil justice funding transaction that complies with this law is not subject to any other state law governing loans or investment contracts.In order to conduct business in the state, a civil justice funding company must register with TDLR, file a bond not to exceed $50,000 (or an irrevocable letter of credit), and biennially renew its registration. The bill prohibits a funding company from: (1) paying or accepting commissions or referral fees to or from a lawyer, law firm, medical provider, chiropractor, or physical therapist (or an employee of any of them); (2) intentionally advertising materially false or misleading information about the company’s services; (3) referring a customer or potential customer to a specific attorney, law firm, medical provider, chiropractor, or physical therapist; (4) failing to promptly supply a copy of the executed contract to the consumer’s attorney; (5) knowingly providing funding to a consumer who has previously assigned or sold a portion of the consumer’s right to proceeds from a legal claim under certain circumstances; (6) making a decision relating to the conduct, settlement, or resolution of the underlying legal claim (this power must remain solely with the consumer and the attorney handling the claim); or (7) knowingly paying or offering to pay, using funds from the civil justice funding transaction, court costs, filing fees, or attorney’s fees during or after the resolution of the claim. If a court finds that a civil justice funding company has committed an intentional violation, the company may recover only the funded amount provided to the consumer without additional charges.

HB 1254 also regulates the form of a civil justice funding contract. A contract must be in writing, contain the initials of the consumer on each page, and be completed when presented to the consumer for signature. A consumer has five business days to rescind the contract without penalty. The contract must further disclose clearly and conspicuously (in at least 12-point bold type) the funded amount to be paid to the consumer, an itemization of one-time charges, the total amount to be assigned by the consumer to the company (including the funded amount and all charges), and a payment schedule that lists all dates and the amount due at the end of each 180-day period from the funding date until the due date of the maximum amount due to the company by the consumer to satisfy the contract. The contract must contain a specific notification of the consumer’s right of rescission, as well as advising the consumer to obtain the advice of an attorney before signing the contract.

The consumer’s attorney must likewise sign a written acknowledgement as part of the contract attesting: (1) to the attorney’s belief that all costs and charges relating to the funding transaction have been disclosed to the consumer; (2) that the attorney is being paid on a contingency basis under a written fee agreement; (3) that all proceeds of the legal claim will be disbursed through the attorney’s trust account or a settlement fund established to receive the proceeds of the claim on the consumer’s behalf; (4) that the attorney is following the consumer’s written instructions regarding the funding transaction; and (5) that the attorney has not received and will not receive a referral fee or other form of consideration from the funding company in connection with the transaction. If the consumer’s attorney does not complete the acknowledgement, the agreement is void.

The civil justice funding company must specify in the contract that the amount to be paid in the event the consumer recovers will be a predetermined amount based on periodic intervals between the funding date and the resolution date, and not an amount determined as a percentage of the recovery from the legal claim. A funding company has a lien on the proceeds of the consumer’s claim inferior only to the attorney’s lien, a Medicare lien, or another statutory lien related to claim.

Communications between the consumer’s attorney and the civil justice funding company pertaining to the funding transaction do not limit, waive, or abrogate the scope or nature of any applicable statutory or common law privilege, including the work-product doctrine and the attorney-client privilege.

Finally, the provisions of HB 1254 do not apply to a funding transaction between the consumer and (1) an immediate family member or (2) an attorney or accountant who provides services to the consumer. It also does not apply to a bank, lender, financing entity, or other special purpose entity that provides financing to a civil justice funding company or to which a civil justice funding company grants a security interest or transfers any rights or interest in a civil justice funding transaction.

HB 1254 would take effect September 1,2013. TDLR shall adopt rules and procedures to implement the bill by January 1, 2014.

Bill History: 03-13-13 S Introduced and referred to committee on Senate State Affairs

  SB 1300

Eltife, Kevin(R) Relating to environmental or health and safety audits under the Texas Environmental, Health, and Safety Audit Privilege Act.
Companions:
HB 3154 Lewis, Tryon (Identical)
  3-19-13 H Introduced and referred to committee on House Environmental Regulation
General Remarks: Remarks copied from: TX83RHB 3154 (03-21-2013 – 10:09:41)SB 1300 by Sen. Kevin Eltife (R-Tyler) and its companion, HB 3154 amend the Texas Environmental, Health, and Safety Privilege Act (Art. 4447cc, VTCS) to protect a person that acquires a regulated facility or operation from liability for civil or administrative penalties for up to six months after the acquisition closing date under certain circumstances. Under existing law, a regulated facility or operation may conduct a systematic voluntary self-evaluation, review, or assessment of compliance with environmental or health safety laws or of any permit issued under those laws. Audit findings may be reported under confidentiality to certain parties and the state for purposes of addressing or correcting a matter raised by the audit, provided that the regulated facility gives notice to the appropriate regulatory agency of the audit. SB 1300/HB 3154 extend the privilege for up to six months after a purchaser acquires the facility, as long as the purchaser completes an ongoing audit within that time (unless the regulatory authority extends the time based on reasonable grounds). The bill further authorizes a prospective purchaser of a regulated facility to perform a privileged audit prior to acquiring the facility as part of the purchaser’s investigation of whether to complete the purchase. The purchaser is shielded from an administrative or civil penalty for a violation voluntarily disclosed to the regulatory agency if: (1) for a violation discovered after the acquisition date, the purchaser commenced the audit prior to the acquisition date and notified the regulatory agency of the fact that an audit was being conducted within 45 days after the acquisition date; and (2) for a violation discovered before the acquisition date, the disclosure is made within 45 days after the closing date. If the violation is discovered in the course of an audit before the acquisition date by either the regulated facility or the acquiring person, the acquiring person may claim the immunity if: (1) the person discovering the violation was not responsible for compliance at the regulated facility with the applicable law violated; (2) the discovering person was not the person with the largest ownership share of the seller; (2) the seller was not the person with the largest ownership share of the person; and (4) the person and seller did not have a common corporate parent or common majority interest owner. SB 1300 has been referred to Senate Natural Resources. HB 3154 has not yet been referred to committee.
Bill History: 03-13-13 S Introduced and referred to committee on Senate Natural Resources

  SB 1339

Duncan, Robert(R) Relating to contractual subrogation rights of certain insurers and benefit plan issuers.
Companions:
HB 1869 Price, Four (Identical)
  3- 5-13 H Introduced and referred to committee on House Judiciary and Civil Jurisprudence
General Remarks: Addresses problems arising under the Texas Supreme Court’s decision in Fortis Benefits v. Cantu, which eliminated the “made-whole” doctrine. That doctrine held that a health insurer is not entitled to subrogation of an injured insured’s recovery of medical expenses until the insured has been made whole. Under the SCOT’s ruling in Fortis, the insurer has a right of first recovery against the insured’s settlement or judgment, even before the insured’s economic damages have been reimbursed. HB 1869 does not overturn Fortis and restore the made-whole doctrine, but it modifies the insurer’s subrogation claim by dividing the insured’s recovery between the insured and the insurer in a case in which the recovery is insufficient to fully reimburse the insured.
Bill History: 03-13-13 S Introduced and referred to committee on Senate State Affairs

  SB 1396

Estes, Craig(R) Relating to state agency investigations.
General Remarks: Sen. Craig Estes (R-Wichita Falls) has filed legislation to give additional due process protections to a person under investigation by a state agency. SB 1396 requires a state agency investigation to be expressly authorized by its enabling statute to institute an investigation against a responding party. The bill establishes procedures allowing a party to object to the agency’s request on the basis that it is overly broad, unduly burdensome, irrelevant, vague, or based on some other ground that would give rise to a valid objection under the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure. It also enables a party to withhold requested information if it is a trade secret or protected by any privilege recognized by law, the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure, or the Texas Rules of Evidence. A state agency may initiate a contested case to obtain a response from a party that has failed to respond to the agency’s request or a ruling on an objection or assertion of privilege. If the party is ordered to produce the information as a result of the contested case hearing, the agency may not seek administrative penalties, attorney’s fees, or other remedies. The party may appeal the hearing examiner’s determination as in any other contested case.In addition, a party objecting to an agency request may file a petition in Travis County district court for an order to set aside, modify, or limit an agency request or response to a request. On good cause shown, the court may issue necessary orders, including a protective order, injunction, or declaratory relief (but not damages or attorney’s fees). Filing a petition stays the state agency investigation or part of the investigation that is the subject of the petition and relieves the petitioner of any obligation to respond to the agency request.

The bill further entitles a party to be represented by counsel and cross-examine witnesses, prohibits an agency from conducting an unannounced office inspection of the party, requires testimony under oath and transcription of all testimony, allows witnesses to be accompanied, represented, and advised by an attorney, and permits a witness or witness’s attorney to object to questioning and refuse to answer questions on grounds of privilege. Information provided to a state agency in the course of an investigation is exempt from disclosure under the Open Records Act and are not discoverable by a third party in a civil lawsuit (with limited exceptions).

Bill History: 03-18-13 S Introduced and referred to committee on Senate Government Organization

  SB 1514

Ellis, Rodney(D) Relating to a correction, clarification, or retraction of incorrect information published.
Companions:
HB 1759 Hunter, Todd (Identical)
  3- 4-13 H Introduced and referred to committee on House Judiciary and Civil Jurisprudence
General Remarks: Rep. Todd Hunter (R-Corpus Christi), publishers that publish timely and sufficient corrections, clarifications, or retractions of allegedly false and defamatory information would not be liable for exemplary damages in a suit for libel. HB 1759 provides that a person may only maintain an action for harm to a personal reputation caused by the false content of a publication if: (1) the person makes a timely and sufficient request for a correction, clarification, or retraction from the publisher; or (2) the defendant has made a correction, clarification, or retraction. Moreover, in order to be entitled to recover exemplary damages, the claimant must make a sufficient request for correction within 90 days after receiving knowledge of the defamatory publication. The bill specifies the contents of a sufficient request and allows the publisher to request reasonably available information regarding the alleged falsity of the defamatory statement. The information must be provided to the publisher within 30 days of the request (limitations is tolled during this period). If the claimant does not furnish the requested information and cannot show good cause why the information has not been produced, the claimant may not recover exemplary damages. Corrections, clarifications, or retractions are sufficient if published in the same or similar manner as the original publication. A defendant seeking to rely on a published correction must disclose the intention to the plaintiff within 60 days after service of the citation or within 10 days after the correction is made. A claimant must challenge the timeliness and sufficiency of a correction not later than 20 days after notice of the defendant’s intention to rely on the correction is served. A defendant may also challenge the timeliness and sufficiency of the claimant’s request for a correction, clarification, or retraction within 60 days after service of the citation. A trial judge must decide as a matter of law whether the claimant’s request for correction is timely and sufficient. If a defendant makes a timely and sufficient correction, clarification, or retraction, the claimant may not recover exemplary damages, unless the original defamatory publication was made with actual malice. Generally, neither a request for a correction nor the fact that a correction was made is admissible into evidence, except in mitigation of damages. An offer to make a correction, clarification, or retraction is likewise inadmissible at trial. HB 1759 applies to all publications, including writings, broadcasts, oral communications, electronic transmissions, or other forms of transmi tting information. The bill calls for immediate effect and would apply to any information published on or after the effective date.
Bill History: 03-19-13 S Introduced and referred to committee on Senate State Affairs

  SB 1637

Duncan, Robert(R) Relating to the authority of the Railroad Commission of Texas to determine whether a person who owns, operates, or manages a pipeline is a common carrier.
General Remarks: TCJL SUPPORTS – In response to the Texas Supreme Court’s decision in the Denbury case, Sen. Robert Duncan (R-Lubbock) has filed legislation establishing an administrative process at the Texas Railroad Commission for the issuance of common carrier pipeline permits. SB 1637 requires an applicant for a common carrier permit to notify the affected landowners, cities, counties, and the public by posting the permit application and map of the proposed route on the Internet, publishing notice in the newspapers, and mailing or delivering notice to the landowners, cities, and counties along the proposed pipeline route. The bill allows landowners, cities, counties, and the RRC staff to protest the permit application and specifies a hearing procedure to be conducted at the commission. The bill further specifies strict time limits for the hearing, the proposal for decision, and the RRC’s final order. A party may appeal the RRC’s final order in the same manner as in any other contested case hearing.
Bill History: 03-20-13 S Introduced and referred to committee on Senate State Affairs

– End of Report –

Pin It on Pinterest

Share This