Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Wrongful Documents topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Controversial "wrongful documents" bill circled after debate over attorney liability and chilling effect
Summary
Lawmakers circled House Bill 20 — renaming and expanding the wrongful‑liens statute to cover 'wrongful documents' and extending liability to those who prepare, record or benefit from fraudulent filings — after extensive debate over expanded civil liability for attorneys and possible chilling effects on legitimate claims.
House Bill 20, a measure intended to address fraudulent filings that cloud property title, was circled Jan. 29 after extensive floor debate about scope and liability.
Sponsor Representative Webb described the bill as a response to filings by "sovereign citizens" and other fraudulent documents that have placed multimillion-dollar liens and releases on property records. Webb said the bill expands who may be affected (title holders, lenders and others with an interest), clarifies procedures for recorders who refuse to record a document or for courts to remove wrongful filings, and broadens potential liability to anyone involved in preparing, recording or benefiting from a wrongful document.
Critics on the floor, including Representatives Green and Christiansen, warned the bill could be overly broad and impose "strict liability" on attorneys, title companies and others who prepare documents in good faith. Christiansen cautioned the measure might spawn litigation and push legitimate claimants to race to court (filing lis pendens) to obtain immunity — producing unintended consequences for courts and property transactions. Representative Green said the bill replaces the term "lien claimant" with "document sponsor" and extends liability in ways that may be unfair to professionals who acted without knowledge of fraud.
The sponsor and supporters responded that penalties are tiered: actual damages when a filing was not intended to be wrongful, an intermediate penalty for those who did not know and failed to release after notice, and up to $10,000 plus treble damages for malicious filings that are not promptly released. Supporters argued the statute is a necessary tool to curb abusive filings that disrupt title transfers and delay closings.
Given the depth of concern and the number of members requesting time, the House voted to circle the bill (postpone for further caucus work and possible amendments). The rules committee and caucuses were asked to take up the issue before further floor action.
No final vote on HB 20 was recorded in the transcript; the bill will return later with potential amendments.
