Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Legislation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Senate Judiciary Committee advances a slate of bills in work session; juvenile, guardianship, adoption and arbitration changes move forward
Summary
The Nevada Senate Judiciary Committee voted to advance multiple bills in a work session, approving amended or do-pass recommendations on measures affecting guardianship, juvenile jurisdiction, adoption, victim access to police reports and civil-arbitration rules.
Get email alerts on the Legislation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The Nevada Senate Judiciary Committee on Thursday advanced a package of bills in a work session, voting to amend or give do-pass recommendations on measures that would change guardianship procedures, juvenile jurisdiction rules, adoption processes, victims’ access to law-enforcement reports and civil arbitration procedures.
The committee, chaired by Sen. Scheibel, moved quickly through more than a dozen bills. Staff member Jared McDonald summarized each measure for the committee before members called for votes. Most motions to amend and do pass carried unanimously with those present; a few bills recorded individual “nay” votes.
The most significant items included: AB 351, which would grant juvenile courts limited jurisdiction to hear certain cases involving people 21 or older when law enforcement did not identify them for prosecution before they turned 21; AB 3, which would raise the monetary threshold for mandatory nonbinding arbitration and change several arbitration provisions; and a pair of adoption and child-welfare bills (AB 227 and AB 520) that revise procedures for adoptions and background checks for child-placing agencies.
Jared McDonald, research division, described AB 3 as revising arbitration provisions to ‘‘increase[] from $50,000 to $100,000 per plaintiff the monetary threshold for mandatory nonbinding arbitration,’’ to adjust arbitrator fee payment provisions, and to authorize short-trial judges to award prevailing-party attorney fees up to $15,000. Sen. Hansen, a committee member, raised a procedural concern about amendments from outside parties to bills originating with the Nevada Supreme Court, saying that such outside amendments could harm the court’s reputation; he concluded, “I will support it as amended.”
Other bills moving forward included measures addressing protective orders for incarcerated respondents (AB 309), victims’ access to unaltered domestic-violence incident reports within one month of a written request (AB 193), revisions to guardianship office names and staffing authority (AB 65), and changes to adoption timelines and remote-appearance rules (AB 227 and AB 520). Several juvenile-justice bills were advanced, including provisions requiring the Juvenile Justice Oversight Commission chair to solicit input about wraparound services (AB 384) and a bill clarifying when juvenile courts may dismiss petitions without prejudice (AB 88).
Votes at a glance (motions moved, seconded and committee outcome): - AB 65 (guardianship): motion to do pass (mover: Sen. Orenshall; second: Sen. Flores); motion carried unanimously with those present. - AB 167 (corrective room restriction reviews): motion to amend and do pass (mover: Sen. Litt; second: Sen. Winn); carried unanimously. - AB 193 (victims’ access to reports): motion to do pass (mover: Sen. Lang; second: Sen. Wynne); carried unanimously. - AB 227 (adoption reforms, remote appearance; timelines reduced from 14 to 7 days in one provision): motion to amend and do pass (mover: Sen. Winn; second: Sen. Orenshall); carried unanimously. - AB 309 (orders for protection—notice to incarcerated adverse parties): motion to do pass (mover: Sen. Winn; second: Sen. Lang); carried unanimously. - AB 351 (juvenile court jurisdiction over certain older defendants): motion to amend and do pass (mover: Sen. Winn; second: Sen. Orenshall); carried unanimously. - AB 384 (Juvenile Justice Oversight Commission input/reporting on wraparound services): motion to do pass (mover: Sen. Orenshall; second: Sen. Wynne); carried unanimously. - AB 520 / AB 5 20 (adoption licensing and background checks for child-placing agencies; DCFS revisions): motion to amend and do pass (mover: Sen. Wynne; second: Sen. Lang); carried unanimously. - AB 3 (alternative dispute resolution/arbitration): motion to amend and do pass (mover: Sen. Wynne; second: Sen. Orenshall); carried to amend and do pass after discussion; Sen. Hansen voiced concern about outside parties amending Supreme Court-sponsored bills but said he would support the amended bill. - AB 88 (juvenile informal supervision/district attorney approval rules): motion to amend and do pass (mover: Sen. Wynne; second: Sen. Orenshall); carried with one recorded nay from Sen. Ellison. - AB 192 (Uniform Easement Relocation Act; Uniform Mortgage Modification Act): motion to do pass (mover: Sen. Orenshall; second: Sen. Lang); carried with recorded nays from Sens. Ellison, Krasner and Wynne. - AB 488 (vacatur/sealing for victims of human trafficking expanded to crimes under state law/local ordinances): motion to amend and do pass (mover: Sen. Wynne; second: Sen. Orenshall); carried with two recorded nays (Sens. Krasner and Ellison). - AB 489 (civil actions for wrongful death caused by homicide; retroactivity and other changes): motion to amend and do pass (mover: Sen. Wynne; second: Sen. Lang); carried with one recorded nay from Vice Chair Flores.
Discussion and procedure Committee members asked few technical questions during staff summaries; most exchanges consisted of staff explanation followed by immediate motions. The committee assigned floor statements to volunteer senators after votes, as is typical in work-session practice. Where specific amendments were noted on the record, staff identified the source (for example, Clark County submitted an amendment to AB 167 to replace the term "assessment" with "review," and DCFS submitted a post-hearing amendment deleting certain background-check sections in AB 520).
What this means next Bills that received a do-pass or amend-and-do-pass recommendation in committee will move to the next step in the legislative process (floor consideration) where additional debate, amendments, or roll-call votes may occur. Several bills advanced with no recorded opposition in committee; a few carried individual recorded nays, which will be visible on the committee record and may be raised again on the floor.
The committee recessed briefly at the end of the session and noted members would return for additional work-session items later in the day.

