Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Court Procedure topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee recommends 'do not pass' on bill to lower threshold for vexatious-litigant findings
Summary
The House Judiciary Committee voted 7-4 with three members absent to recommend a do-not-pass on Senate Bill 2382, which would have changed procedures for declaring vexatious litigants by lowering a numeric threshold and requiring pre-filing orders be sent to federal district courts.
Get email alerts on the Court Procedure topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The House Judiciary Committee recommended a do-not-pass on Senate Bill 2382 by a 7-4 vote, rejecting a proposal to change the procedures that can be used to declare a litigant vexatious. The bill would have reduced one of the numeric thresholds in the court rule from three prior adverse litigations to two and would have required state clerks to send pre-filing orders to the federal district clerks for the district.
Committee members reviewed minutes from the Joint Procedure Committee, which had considered proposed amendments to Rule 58. The joint committee discussion noted two proposed changes: lowering the numeric threshold for prior adverse litigations from three to two, and requiring state clerks to notify federal district clerks when a pre-filing order is issued. The joint committee motion to approve the amendment failed; the state committee discussion echoed concerns about whether the change was necessary or whether existing rules already addressed abusive litigation.
Representative Wolff moved a do-not-pass recommendation, seconded by Representative Van Winkle. Committee members who supported the do-not-pass said that the existing court rule contained multiple pathways to declare a litigant vexatious, including a provision that allows a judge to act within a single litigation if warranted, and preferred to leave the procedural changes to the courts. Members who supported the bill argued making the rule statutory would increase public visibility and that some litigants’ conduct justified a lower numeric threshold.
The clerk recorded a committee vote of 7 in favor of the do-not-pass motion and 4 opposed, with three members absent. The committee named Representative Wolff as the bill carrier for the committee action.
