[{"_1":2,"_88":-5,"_89":-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],{"_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",6325974,"mediaKeyId","2330336-d8780afd05216d0b223551824b50f1ca","parentId",2330336,"title","Committee backs bill barring compensated sureties from lending initial bond premium","audioSeconds",65,"startMs",664029,"endMs",729555,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=2330336-d8780afd05216d0b223551824b50f1ca&start=664&end=729","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2330336-d8780afd05216d0b223551824b50f1ca/thumbnail_664029.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6325974/Kansas/Committee-backs-bill-barring-compensated-sureties-from-lending-initial-bond-premium","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6325974-2cdcd61a64b070a3a8f5e89fc1208bd0/orig.mp4?Expires=1773601856&Signature=E-g-fEfV1YpeoUNgId0geNpcHj8HuqaDWcrClFqojaqPDduVEEK724Cv2sKWil1WmIA26C6gOqrrA7ZqlGtZ0CT4sItxn7cQhxV6w9~ElFT3MjkdrZbuwtFqWvkE8PMGaWeaJfOJ~meTfMAezZkxaPIn9C4d88qMoGvjFVpGDKYPnR1-vj6MKYl2BItHCDnPpPQcUsIpxIxCJ52lNCmi8Dg8Sj6zCK1dTrVIEkH9TctnKP3boHjBO3FDCfPZqjMhKEY1M0GkrWIMbD556rQKX4ITzFm5XgDIVz986QjJiecTNKBOSGV3-6dhGhqPnWWOXVeziPK~~L070rYiWfIoFw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Kansas Legislature","date","2025-02-17T00:00:00Z","article","The Senate Judiciary Committee recommended Senate Bill 244 favorably for passage after a brief presentation by the reviser explaining the bill’s effect on appearance bond premiums.

The reviser reminded the committee of the prior change to the minimum appearance bond premium and summarized the bill: “you'll recall last year, you guys put in a minimum appearance bond premium of 10%, and then 5% of that has to be given upfront. This would prohibit a compensated surety from making a loan for that initial 5%. Any loan obtained for the purpose of paying that initial 5% would have to be from a licensed, lending provider. And no compensated surety would be able to be affiliated with or an owner of, a lender who is making loans for that 5% portion.”

There was no recorded debate on the bill in the provided excerpt. Senator Titus moved that the committee recommend Senate Bill 244 favorably for passage; the motion was seconded by Senator Klempe and passed by voice vote in the excerpt. The transcript does not record a roll‑call tally.

By barring sureties from providing loans for the initial premium and requiring loans, if any, to come from licensed lenders unaffiliated with the surety, the bill targets the specific financing arrangement used to cover the upfront portion of the bond premium. The reviser framed the bill as a clarification of the premium financing rules established previously.

The committee adjourned after reporting its bills for turnaround; next steps for Senate Bill 244 will follow the chamber’s scheduling rules for reported bills.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Senate Committee on Judiciary 02/17/2025","oneSentenceSummary","Senate Bill 244 was recommended favorably by the Senate Judiciary Committee; it would prohibit compensated sureties from making loans to cover the initial 5% of a defendant’s required minimum appearance bond premium and require any such loan to come from a licensed lender unaffiliated with the surety.","taxTitle"," Judiciary, Standing, Senate, Committees, Legislative, Kansas","taxId",18805,"location","Kansas","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},6325977,"Committee advances substitute for Senate Bill 54 requiring disclosure of third‑party litigation funding",580,44950,625685,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2330336-d8780afd05216d0b223551824b50f1ca&start=44&end=625","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2330336-d8780afd05216d0b223551824b50f1ca/thumbnail_44950.jpg","/articles/6325977/Kansas/Committee-advances-substitute-for-Senate-Bill-54-requiring-disclosure-of-thirdparty-litigation-funding","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6325977-5730a98bfed2a414bfeae58447088cf6/orig.mp4?Expires=1773601856&Signature=P1aMZnrG9iR7XCGXnsEezLFj7jM-O58xrXHGKyfiP2A3JG0eMGeD7w1jR3H7iWebjja~zf2dnCjJJTiuJYGAVspgDbeOtTlRrY1OgkNSqbMoB0coc~KskMqsBP8~P7KJupizB9rpuzmKTvvanTtinezOxGJ60RiUA6xrmu-E9UPnIe6pwUKurJLnqaPXMXOtKQ7g8aKhclAn1prj3rodlbzxaCQ~mVKgjhrfzK2DNfG2s0fthLtOG7idudlvRYC0ewdk~0XEgOStlB9TsHimMlORfhM3ukzgst~~aHsD63qqFv6MhshpfaT7svyYdXvSPsoHSyON0d3uBJeJCpUKmw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Senate Judiciary Committee on an undisclosed date voted to advance the senate substitute for Senate Bill 54 after adopting amendments of the committee. The measure would require parties to provide courts with third‑party litigation funding agreements and to deliver sworn statements to other parties, and it adds reporting duties for the Judicial Council.

The reviser told the committee, “before you, you have a proposed substitute bill,” and summarized key provisions, saying the substitute requires a party to provide the court with any third‑party litigation funding agreement “within 30 days after the action is commenced or after that agreement is executed, whichever is later,” and to deliver a sworn statement to other parties in the same 30‑day time frame. The reviser added that the substitute preserves limitations that the disclosure requirement does not necessarily make agreements admissible as evidence and “is not construed to require a nonprofit to disclose its members or donors.”

Committee members described the amendment package as a compromise. Senator Shane urged support, saying the bill “is an appropriate compromise bill,” and Senator Titus said he supported the amended substitute after following the bill’s evolution and the work of interested parties.

An amendment adopted in committee revised the Judicial Council reporting schedule and the form of the council’s study. The reviser explained the amendment removes a requirement that the Judicial Council “establish a committee” and instead directs the Judicial Council itself to study third‑party litigation funding and to submit a report with “conclusions and recommendations” to the chief justice, the attorney general, the Senate Judiciary Committee, and the House Committee on Judiciary. As amended, the study deadline was reworked in committee discussion: the reviser said the study date language was adjusted to a January 1, 2030 deadline in one subsection and that the Judicial Council would be required, beginning January 1, 2031 and each January 1 thereafter, to report the total number of reports received in the previous calendar year.

The substitute also contains confidentiality and recordkeeping provisions. The reviser said clerks would prescribe a form, and that those reports “will still be confidential under CORA.” The substitute requires courts to provide copies of received agreements to the Judicial Council and for the Judicial Council to notify the reporting party that the agreement was received.

The reviser noted new definitions added in the substitute (including terms used earlier in the bill such as “foreign country of concern” and “foreign person”), and pointed members to the list of disclosure elements in the substitute.

After discussion, Senator Shane moved to report the senate substitute for Senate Bill 54 favorably from committee as amended; the motion was seconded and passed. The committee did not record a roll‑call tally in the transcript excerpt provided.

Because the committee advanced the substitute as amended, the bill will proceed in the legislative process as determined by chamber rules.

","The Senate Judiciary Committee adopted a substitute for Senate Bill 54 that would require parties to disclose third‑party litigation funding agreements to the court and to other parties, and would direct the Judicial Council to study and report on those agreements beginning in 2030.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Committee backs bill barring compensated sureties from lending initial bond premium

Committee advances substitute for Senate Bill 54 requiring disclosure of third‑party litigation funding