Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Probate Judges Costs topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee reviews bill to require estates or parties to pay traveling probate judge costs
Summary
Senate Bill 302 would require parties or estates to bear the cost when a contested probate case is assigned to a traveling probate judge, removing unintended county cost burdens, witnesses said. The committee heard explanation and left the bill pending.
The chair laid out Senate Bill 302 and recognized its author, Secretary Perry, to explain the measure concerning traveling probate judge reimbursement for rural counties.
Secretary Perry told the committee that under current law counties must pay the cost of traveling probate judges when assignment is requested for contested probate matters and that the proposed change would allow the estate or parties to bear the cost. "Under current law, counties are required to pay for the cost of the traveling judge," Perry said, noting that a free option remains if cases are handled by an existing county judge's court or by district court in uncontested matters.
Perry said the substitute would clarify whether the estate or the parties may pay when a traveling judge is requested so that small counties are not unexpectedly charged. Rick Thompson was registered as a proponent but did not testify on the record; no other public testimony was offered. The committee left the bill pending and awaited the committee substitute.
Why it matters: Committee members were told that only 12 of 254 counties have a permanent probate judge so assigned traveling judges are common; clarifying who pays could shift costs to estates or parties that request assignment for contested matters.
