Judiciary Committee

JOINT FAVORABLE REPORT

Bill No.:

HB-5150

Title:

AN ACT CONCERNING THE CONNECTICUT UNIFORM ADULT PROTECTIVE PROCEEDINGS JURISDICTION ACT.

Vote Date:

3/21/2012

Vote Action:

Joint Favorable

PH Date:

3/5/2012

File No.:

SPONSORS OF BILL:

Judiciary Committee

REASONS FOR BILL:

The Connecticut Bar Association requested introduction of this bill, which provides procedures to resolve interstate jurisdiction controversies, facilitate the transfer of cases between jurisdictions, and provide recognition and enforcement of a guardianship or protective proceeding order. Currently there are problems that arise regularly in courts across the nation when individuals involved in conservatorship proceedings have connections with more than one state. This bill establishes uniform and nationwide procedures to address the issues associated with interstate conservatorship matters.

RESPONSE FROM ADMINISTRATION/AGENCY:

Paul J. Knierim, Probate Court Administrator: Supports this bill that establishes a mechanism to determine which state is the most appropriate to act, thereby avoiding conflicting proceedings in multiple states. The enactment of this bill is necessary in order to protect the interests of the disabled persons who are the subject of the conservatorship orders.

NATURE AND SOURCES OF SUPPORT:

AARP: Strongly supports this bill to protect the interests of vulnerable incapacitated adults who need guardians and to make the guardianship system function more efficient, fair, and cost-effective. This uniform act can reduce the incidence of elder abuse in a number of ways, including reducing “granny-snatching”, permitting a court to consider which jurisdiction can best protect a person subject to abuse, facilitating communication between courts in different states about allegations of abuse, and transferring cases between states to remove individuals from abusive situations. This uniform act has been adopted by 29 states and the District of Columbia with scarcely any opposition.

Alzheimer's Association, Connecticut Chapter, Christine I. Andrew, Esq. and Richard S. Fisher, Esq.: Supports this bill. It is critical to have procedures in place to determine which court, in a mult-state situation, has the right to make decisions. Passage of this bill would allow cases involving jurisdictional issues to be settled more quickly and more consistently, as well as reduce economic and emotional costs to affected individuals and their families.

Connecticut Bar Association, Suzanne Brown Walsh: Supports this bill which fills three major gaps in the existing conservator/guardianship laws of every state: facilitating transfers from state to state, registering an order from one state in another, and resolving disputes over which state is the proper forum for an underlying guardianship hearing. By providing much needed clarity regarding jurisdictional rules, this bill will reduce the cost of litigation to the parties and the state.

Connecticut Legal Services, Joelen J. Gates: Supports this bill. This bill is an improvement over current Connecticut law, providing a mechanism and criteria for Connecticut courts to determine the appropriate jurisdiction when a person has connections to different states.

Karen Jackson: Submitted her 'Motion to Amended Civil Rights Complaint and Explanation for Plantiffs' Failure to Procecute' filed with the U.S. District Court, Bridgeport, Connecticut on October 19, 2010. This document appears to outline Ms. Jackson's frustration with the Connecticut Department of Social Services. It is unclear to what extent this document either supports or opposes this bill, as it makes no reference to the Connecticut Uniform Adult Protective Proceedings Jurisdiction Act.

NATURE AND SOURCES OF OPPOSITION:

None Submitted.

Reported by: Meredith Blake

Date: March 21, 2012