Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Conservatorship Liability Reform topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee adopts substitute for HB 125 to create court approval process for conservatorship actions
Summary
Lawmakers approved a committee substitute to HB 125 that creates a court petition-and-notice process allowing conservators to seek court approval and limited liability for approved actions; committee reported the substitute favorably while issuing a do‑not‑pass on the original bill.
The House Consumer and Public Affairs Committee voted on a committee substitute for House Bill 125, a measure intended to resolve a legal uncertainty that has discouraged people and organizations from serving as conservators in New Mexico.
Representative David Matthews, sponsor of HB 125, described the substitute as a fix to problems created by a 2018 revision to the Uniform Probate Code. Under the substitute, a conservator may petition the court for approval of proposed actions or for adjudication of final accounts; the conservator must serve notice on persons identified in the original guardianship or conservatorship order and the court must schedule a hearing on objections.
Greg McKenzie, appearing by Zoom as an adviser on probate practice, summarized the change: the substitute “creates a process by which a conservator can approach the court, for the purpose of getting an action approved, a proposed action, or a report approved” and thereby aligns conservatorship practice with typical trust and probate procedures used in other fiduciary contexts.
Proponents said the change will increase the pool of qualified conservators by allowing a judicially approved action to shield conservators from later unlimited liability for conduct the court approved. Witnesses described that after the 2018 revisions, some qualified organizations declined to serve as conservators because they could not obtain certainty about the duration of their potential liability.
The committee adopted the Consumer and Public Affairs Committee substitute and then voted to report the substitute favorably while issuing a do‑not‑pass recommendation on the original version of HB 125. Committee roll call was recorded during the session; the committee reported a do‑not‑pass on the underlying bill and a favorable report on the substitute by recorded vote.
Committee members asked technical questions about procedure: if a conservator seeks a final report approval after a conservatorship terminates (for example, after death or restoration of capacity), HB 125 requires the conservator to file the petition and serve notice before receiving the court’s protections. Representatives clarified that the substitute does not reduce conservators’ duties but provides a procedural path to obtain judicial approval and a release from personal liability for approved actions.
The committee directed staff and sponsors to coordinate with pending related legislation and court advisory groups to keep statutory language consistent. The committee’s action sends the substitute forward for further legislative consideration with a favorable committee report on the substitute and a record of the committee’s do‑not‑pass on the original bill.
