Senate Judiciary Committee reviews S.109 technical fixes: powers of attorney, remote attorney access, public‑inebriation policy and other sections

The Senate Judiciary Committee spent several hours on March 12 reviewing proposed additions and technical clarifications to the miscellaneous Judiciary bill, S.109. Committee staff and outside witnesses discussed multiple discrete sections ranging from a validating provision for instruments signed under a missing power of attorney to a proposal to expand remote court‑record access for licensed Vermont attorneys.

James (Jim) Knapp, a retired attorney who described more than four decades of experience in property law and title insurance, urged the committee to adopt language that would validate instruments recorded at least 15 years ago even if the underlying power of attorney cannot be found. "If the instrument signed under a power of attorney has been on record for at least 15 years, then the document is valid even if the power of attorney can't be found," Knapp said, describing recurring title problems when a power of attorney was never recorded or was misindexed.

Supporters and other witnesses said the 15‑year period aligns with similar curative provisions in other states and with quiet‑title limitations. Chris Diodi, president of the Ontellus Association, told the committee his group supports the proposed language and said he was "comfortable with what Jen explained to you, the 15 year timeframe." Legal stakeholders at the hearing — including Liz Smith, managing counsel at Caddock (trade…