[{"_1":2,"_124":-5,"_125":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,76,88,100,112],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},"mediaId",6332073,"mediaKeyId","2308978-cf051a67a9eb5948d04661cf3d25ed43","parentId",2308978,"title","Subcommittee debates prioritizing child support in estate disbursements; amendment under consideration","audioSeconds",686,"startMs",1993000,"endMs",2679000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=2308978-cf051a67a9eb5948d04661cf3d25ed43&start=1993&end=2679","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2308978-cf051a67a9eb5948d04661cf3d25ed43/thumbnail_1993000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6332073/Maryland/Subcommittee-debates-prioritizing-child-support-in-estate-disbursements-amendment-under-consideration","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6332073-8506b86472ffc21d9ef99835d275fab7/orig.mp4?Expires=1777528871&Signature=ibDcNYFgH9CdmZp7yTGKeKqU1fpdnIIqqjgY4URhuI9E5uQbUQnC2wSXuCYeYhXK5HP9yAbHBHlpfz2KIoypRT5SgSMusAiZyp60Z0NdD1EL~MqzLOsUC9XKTZcCzpoZTMug0Yaug4FIW08yh0qca4nVa5ELemdC11NAWYJdpcZDSL~5FeJ2FxWwfvpyjwnW~Kpg0kBZbS03W4JuZjvEky4X31p3f7Y3Q330LeeaQUdDcrJduhXZickGQ0mMX~qtGRxJmvuz7bbSfSJRmX0~tgyPWw5Fq~PhbiUncMy6KHVsAwt80f8mkUvwJZtEzo2-ut~LdWhmnhSLSdA4~L8Tvw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","MGA - JUD","date","2025-02-13T00:00:00Z","article","The Civil Law Subcommittee discussed House Bill 261, a proposal to change the priority ranking for unpaid child support in estate distributions. Committee members debated whether and how to give child support higher claim priority when the child remains dependent at the time of the decedent’s death.

Chairman Delegate Carden summarized the issue: child support currently sits low in the list of priorities paid from estates. He described a hypothetical: if a decedent dies owing child support for a now‑adult child in their 50s, should that arrearage take precedence over other creditors? He said the question led the sponsor to consider targeted prioritization.

Delegates suggested possible guardrails. Delegate Tolles said many child-support obligations extend for college, trade school or other post‑secondary education and suggested prioritizing support where the child is still in school. \"So perhaps adding that, you know, up until 21 or 22 or even post college for most child support payments, they do go up,\" Tolles said.

Delegate Embry and others favored narrower relief than a blanket priority for all arrears: Embry said she would rather ensure funds reach a child or caregiver while avoiding providing windfalls to adult children who are no longer dependents. Delegate Phillips and others discussed practical and policy trade-offs including existing state collections and creditors’ claims.

Chairman Carden said he would consult with the sponsor and the child-support office (Alexis Roady was unable to attend) and work on potential amendment language to bring back to the subcommittee. No formal motion or vote was recorded.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","CLP Committee Session, 2/13/2025 #1","oneSentenceSummary","Members discussed House Bill 261, which would change the priority of unpaid child support in estate distributions. Delegates explored amendments to give higher priority when the child is a dependent (proposed age thresholds or college attendance). No vote was taken.","taxTitle","Judiciary Committee, HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, Committees, Legislative, Maryland","taxId",15063,"location","Maryland","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":77,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":78,"_41":79,"_43":80,"_45":81,"_47":82,"_49":83,"_51":84,"_53":85,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":86,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":87,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6332078,"Panel approves bill prohibiting counties from enforcing local rules penalizing calls for law enforcement",192,1729000,1921000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2308978-cf051a67a9eb5948d04661cf3d25ed43&start=1729&end=1921","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2308978-cf051a67a9eb5948d04661cf3d25ed43/thumbnail_1729000.jpg","/articles/6332078/Maryland/Panel-approves-bill-prohibiting-counties-from-enforcing-local-rules-penalizing-calls-for-law-enforcement","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6332078-33dcbfc0f5217973e943862163275a76/orig.mp4?Expires=1777528871&Signature=NUHzyCc7KUDLisEMvwTvZfZFDFOrEd1tkIVpdLQV7OoKFE--DvheBQt4EtRD7MG8wy9GhpqBEQwZMrNzO-S6qMYKkj5nTFNBX7cYNtrkkX780Y7kOVJ~WvYJtcjM34FQqsjTYwxZuk3mNydKSrM1N9nCfMOL1LLKHBNrvbf-~UieQ8Fh7cSex4LhxjWvDwpbbHqxRKu2UVXfbB3K-x1gR7bFJFvGQqUjObP1uSIXuSoWX9XLlrLWHf72O~8a4e8k7PrikXsWnFSoO0~7oQD-iR6qM5fcxbuKKb9Vk7oAQa~JUAexC8zaPXmpvXWeoJp3ya5XBPvqe5h7ETbqMHKLrA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Civil Law Subcommittee advanced House Bill 249, a measure that prevents counties and municipalities from enacting or enforcing local laws that set thresholds for summoning law enforcement or that penalize people for calling for emergency services.

A committee witness summarized the problem: the sponsor's intent in earlier legislation was to forbid both enactment and enforcement of ordinances that would limit or punish calls for law enforcement. \"When the bill was passed, it only prohibited enacting. So these local municipalities can still enforce local laws that are still there,\" the witness said. The current bill clarifies the language to prohibit both enactment and enforcement.

Committee members described the change as correcting an oversight from the prior session. After discussion, a motion to advance the legislation was offered, seconded and adopted; the transcript records the motion passing with members indicating support by hand-raising.","House Bill 249 clarifies earlier legislation by prohibiting counties and municipalities from enacting or enforcing ordinances that establish thresholds for summoning law enforcement or penalize those who summon emergency services. The subcommittee voted to advance the bill.",{"_33":89,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":90,"_41":91,"_43":92,"_45":93,"_47":94,"_49":95,"_51":96,"_53":97,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":98,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":99,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6332083,"Committee advances bill to let trustees resign without court approval if notice given",448,1208000,1656000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2308978-cf051a67a9eb5948d04661cf3d25ed43&start=1208&end=1656","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2308978-cf051a67a9eb5948d04661cf3d25ed43/thumbnail_1208000.jpg","/articles/6332083/Maryland/Committee-advances-bill-to-let-trustees-resign-without-court-approval-if-notice-given","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6332083-24a835c7174f74636203a14906e31e6b/orig.mp4?Expires=1777528871&Signature=OBaf3M9lK41qKv6M-hov5oF-ShflSu4b~Ugut2U07ACuCIJt~3stbq1gfXUDr~Rk~XXlwA8WiprzZXlDh~sWcELh4AafFB~Vyj0qp1kD8vTdKoCXo7R3DH~oSgzwy1ubAmOc491C0eI6ZIWM66oJGI4UV7SqsRPwd0-s9prZ2vhojH-Selgu-Pip6w670IK47mbnxK80uBXS7Iv0uUXa8TdNEMsOL3e8UdCXNi0pdWTkkF4WBV1CjOpjVzESg9cSBiUXW0tWKrtrs4D7kLlhwZBdoh2TSshF89ljT4bYyH7mf5GMPgqT51pJPM6oRMlBhwZkOgHhetqDRtY79jp-qw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Civil Law Subcommittee voted to advance House Bill 146, which authorizes a trustee to resign without prior court approval provided required notice is given to beneficiaries, the settlor and other fiduciaries when the trust instrument does not already set out a resignation procedure.

Miss Thomas of the State Bar explained the bill’s mechanics: \"This applies just when a trust does not specify how a trustee can resign. Under current law, the only way to do it is through a court procedure. So we're adding an additional way for a trustee to be able to resign if the trust agreement does not contain that information,\" she said.

Members asked several questions about successor appointment and recording. Miss Thomas said vacancies are handled under the trust act: a successor can be named in the document, selected by unanimous agreement of qualified beneficiaries, or appointed by a court. She also said recording of changes in trustees typically occurs when real property is conveyed and is not automatically done simply because a trustee resigns.

A motion to report the bill favorably was moved and seconded; committee members indicated their positions by hand-raising. The chair recorded that the bill passed at the committee level during the session.","House Bill 146 would add a non‑court pathway for trustee resignation when the trust document is silent; the subcommittee voted favorably and the bill passed the committee stage recorded in the session notes.",{"_33":101,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":102,"_41":103,"_43":104,"_45":105,"_47":106,"_49":107,"_51":108,"_53":109,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":110,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":111,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6332086,"Subcommittee considers trust-decanting bill, votes to report it unfavorably",101,1072000,1173000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2308978-cf051a67a9eb5948d04661cf3d25ed43&start=1072&end=1173","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2308978-cf051a67a9eb5948d04661cf3d25ed43/thumbnail_1072000.jpg","/articles/6332086/Maryland/Subcommittee-considers-trust-decanting-bill-votes-to-report-it-unfavorably","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6332086-bfa241a52cd217626491f2512c04ef2e/orig.mp4?Expires=1777528871&Signature=hVi8wtNGCSpRU2R6MH7H~gQVfFdB7i5Xas34xoZRFCjuq3b4LhSaWm-K07uY33j6KRb0JYmKuMIqVA97NCGd5yFFtVnvfI886yAN2bwJYwm3nTNG5BX7-OXdmN1kJcgteWeEwcEUIABeJmK~3NYXHTbZSDSLmWk8ko-BC2pNGNeJNYunT-1L~IvDFplTKjMikStRVfHKcGuR~nfQrodKEZ91ihnkAXn76gD2zh6k1YywqfVGsu-IoyV39wYNOECKQ~7psD0SSzQVh1pkk-SN7H7CK4u6kvCp9XLSV1NLTlzUo6zVaLaAsLKyrMlB6VD8ZirspmxhCzzgyufXosvbxQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Civil Law Subcommittee considered House Bill 88, which relates to provisions of the Maryland trust decanting act, heard testimony from legal and banking representatives, and moved to give the bill an unfavorable report.

Chairman Delegate Carden described the bill as noncontroversial in prior consideration and invited questions. The State Bar’s representative, Miss Thomas, answered technical questions about the bill’s effect. \"It really applies just when a trust does not specify how a trustee can resign,\" Miss Thomas told the subcommittee, explaining that the existing law requires court approval in that situation and the proposal would create an additional, non‑court pathway when notice is provided to interested parties.

Committee members noted support from the bankers association and the State Bar. After brief discussion, a member moved an unfavorable report and a second was recorded. Chairman Carden asked members to indicate their positions by raising hands; the motion carried without recorded opposition in the transcript.","Members reviewed House Bill 88, tied to the Maryland trust decanting act, heard testimony from the State Bar and banking representatives, and moved an unfavorable report; the motion was approved during the session.",{"_33":113,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":114,"_41":115,"_43":116,"_45":117,"_47":118,"_49":119,"_51":120,"_53":121,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":122,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":123,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6332089,"Subcommittee discusses amendment that would require both print and digital public notices; vote deferred",947,110000,1057000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2308978-cf051a67a9eb5948d04661cf3d25ed43&start=110&end=1057","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2308978-cf051a67a9eb5948d04661cf3d25ed43/thumbnail_110000.jpg","/articles/6332089/Maryland/Subcommittee-discusses-amendment-that-would-require-both-print-and-digital-public-notices-vote-deferred","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6332089-40fe41921fa2964ea0a53140a86712a5/orig.mp4?Expires=1777528871&Signature=Pe9wu~RppIX-duGHX50sO1a259h0vOgvI-TrryDgonHKWXhzK7XsFBv2bAL4svtC7NgowjBfh8b4Ut7WRXKuOYgHxNGpXiQruJlrr69CldSD9b6V36G1-ls7YtNk91D9n6o9eNUT1BES4RZnJJBO~tJhhZKndbMAKKQz~k9sKOxxkaiqHuylY7Jxf~QbBWMb-57tx1Exu8cNIvEY-VIR-FvG0yq8VFEJUtNKvy3YfD7Sc1JXd2G5Yopczgb7N8VLYtkSIIdPgUjqYkx5Lvb7R-frYG4AgLwFMElCMb15xybGjY6yy7A6cmDvJu9rJm-kvefOSP3y-YD5QGxXC9RoLw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Civil Law Subcommittee of the Judiciary Committee discussed House Bill 74 on publication of public notices and agreed to take the measure up for a vote at a later meeting.

Chairman Delegate Carden opened discussion of House Bill 74 and asked proponents and opponents to weigh in. Lorenzo Bellamy proposed an amendment that would replace “or” with “and” in the bill’s notice provisions on page 2, lines 16 and 18, so that notices would be published in both print and digital versions when both are available. \"The amendment ... would basically just strike the word or, where it says print, or digital and strike that to say and,\" Bellamy said.

Rebecca Snyder, representing the Maryland-DC Press Association, described the bill as intended to recognize the blended print-and-digital products used by many local papers. \"This bill is meant to allow publication in the digital version of the customary publications that are already being utilized for public notice,\" Snyder said, adding that the draft contemplates a situation where no print publication exists and digital-only publication would be allowed.

Delegate Embry noted the amendment’s likely practical effect. \"This does mean that all online publications do not have that unless unless they don't exist, unless there's no print in the locality,\" Embry said, referencing outlets such as the Baltimore Banner that publish digital-only editions.

Members pressed for clarity on timing language in the bill, with several pointing to a clause (page 2, line 20) that addresses situations where no print publication exists. Holly, a State Bar representative participating in the meeting, explained the Dorchester County model that helped shape the draft: some counties publish only weeklies and commissioners wanted the option to start statutorily prescribed timing with the digital posting of notices.

Chairman Carden said he would confirm with the bill sponsor about the proposed amendment and bring the item back for a vote at the next meeting. No formal committee vote was taken on House Bill 74 during this session.","The Judiciary Committee’s Civil Law Subcommittee debated House Bill 74 and an amendment that would change statutory notice language from “or” to “and,” making publication required in both print and digital formats when both exist. The subcommittee agreed to revisit the proposal at a future meeting.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Subcommittee debates prioritizing child support in estate disbursements; amendment under consideration

Panel approves bill prohibiting counties from enforcing local rules penalizing calls for law enforcement

Committee advances bill to let trustees resign without court approval if notice given

Subcommittee considers trust-decanting bill, votes to report it unfavorably

Subcommittee discusses amendment that would require both print and digital public notices; vote deferred