State Statutory Authority for Restoration of Rights in Termination of Adult Guardianship

Size: px
Start display at page:

Download "State Statutory Authority for Restoration of Rights in Termination of Adult Guardianship"

Transcription

1 State Statutory Authority for Restoration of Rights in Termination of Adult Guardianship Guardianships 1 are designed to protect the interest of incapacitated adults. Guardianship is the only proceeding in American courts in which adults can be permanently deprived of rights solely in order to protect their well-being when they are unable to care for themselves. 2 Due to the loss of individual rights, guardianships should be a last resort option when no other less restrictive alternatives are available, both at the time of adjudication and throughout the guardianship. An adult under guardianship who has regained capacity has the right to restoration. While it is most common for a guardianship to end upon the death of the individual, in all jurisdictions the court can terminate a guardianship upon finding that the individual has regained capacity sufficient to manage his or her personal or financial affairs. In some cases the conditions that interfere with capacity are temporary or the individual has responded to treatment. In other cases additional evidence and the presence of a supportive environment may demonstrate that a guardianship is unnecessary. Unlike an appointment of a guardian, the statutory legal procedure for restoration is often unclear and ambiguous. 3 The procedural process, as well and the duties of the court and of the guardian, vary significantly by state, court, and judge. Due to the inconsistency among state statutes, variations in practice, and lack of hard data on restoration proceedings, it is unclear whether current guardianship law adequately protects an individual s right to restoration. This paper examines state statutory provisions concerning restoration of rights 4 in four areas: (1) general procedure for restoration; (2) the evidentiary standard expressly provided for in the statute; (3) the procedural barriers and safeguards in restoration proceedings; and (4) the role of the guardian and of the court upon termination. PROCEDURAL PROCESS IN A PETITION FOR RESTORATION The UGPPA, revised by the National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws (currently the Uniform Law Commission) in 1997, strongly supports the rights of the incapacitated person. Under the Act, guardians must encourage the protected individual to work towards regaining capacity. 5 The UGPPA has played a major role in the development of 1 Terms vary by state. In many states and the Uniform Guardianship and Protective Proceedings Act, a guardian makes decisions about health care and personal affairs, and a conservator makes decisions about money and property. Other states use the terms guardian of the person and guardian of property or guardian of the estate, Two states (CA and CT) use the term conservator to refer to a decision-maker about an adult s personal and/or financial affairs. The same person or entity could be appointed as both guardian of the person and guardian of the property (conservator), or these roles could be filled by two different people or entities. In this paper, unless otherwise indicated, the terms guardian and guardianship refer to decisionmaking about both personal and financial affairs. 2 Jennifer L. Wright, Guardianship for Your Own Good: Improving the Well-Being of Respondents and Wards in the USA, 33 Int l J.L. & Psychiatry 350, 351 (2010). 3 Wright, supra note 2, at 351 (explaining that the petitioner must prove by clear and convincing evidence that: the respondent is incapable of receiving and understanding relevant information and making decisions based on that information, that this incapacity creates a risk to the well-being of the respondent, and that the proposed guardianship will improve, if not maximize, the well-being of the ward). 4 While this paper focuses on termination of guardianships, the same principles apply to modification of guardianship. The same procedure used for termination can be used in most cases to seek a modification of an existing guardianship, limiting the scope of the order and enhancing self-determination. 5 U.G.P.P.A. Prefatory Note (Supp. 1999).

2 guardianship law throughout the United States. Since its enactment, 15 states have adopted the official language or language substantially similar to the official UGPPA provisions concerning restoration of rights. 6 Three states have provisions with similar language. The primary issue before the court in a restoration proceeding is whether the protected individual has capacity. All jurisdictions permit a petition for termination and restoration should a protected individual regain capacity. The process for restoration, codified in the state statute, varies greatly. A determination of capacity can be made only after an adjudication wherein the court determines any change in circumstance and improvement in capacity of the individual. The manner in which this is accomplished depends on the jurisdiction. In 18 jurisdictions and the Uniform Guardianship and Protective Proceedings Act (UGPPA), the statute simply states that in a petition for restoration and termination, the same procedures apply as in an appointment of a guardianship. 7 Many states and the UGPPA require that a respondent seeking termination be afforded the same rights and protections that are provided in the establishment of the guardianship. 8 Such rights might include the right to notice, the right to personally attend hearings, the right to counsel or a visitor or guardian ad litem, the right to cross-examine witnesses, and the right to appeal. 9 These states include language similar to Nebraska s statute that states, If the court has reason to believe that additional rights should be returned to the ward, the court shall set a date for a hearing and may provide all protections as set forth for the original finding of incapacity and appointment of a guardian. 10 Most states provide very broad permission to the protected individual or any interested party to seek restoration. Often, the only limitation in the statute is that such petition must be filed on 6 These fifteen states are: Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Colorado, District of Columbia, Idaho, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Montana, Nebraska, New Mexico, North Dakota, South Dakota, and Utah. Ala. Code 26-2A-110; Alaska Stat. Ann , ; Ariz. Rev. Stat. Ann ; Colorado Revised Statutes Annotated ; D.C. Code ; Idaho Code Ann ; Mass. Gen. Laws Ann. ch. 190B, 5-311; Mich. Comp. Laws Ann ; Minn. Stat. Ann ; Mont. Code Ann ; Neb. Rev. Stat ; N.M. Stat. Ann ; N.D. Cent. Code Ann (5-307); S.D. Codified Laws 29A A-5-509; Utah Code Ann These eighteen jurisdictions are: Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Colorado, District of Columbia, Hawaii, Idaho, Louisiana, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Montana, Nebraska, New Mexico, North Dakota, Oregon, South Dakota, Utah. Ala. Code 26-2A-110; Alaska Stat. Ann , ; Ariz. Rev. Stat. Ann ; Colorado Revised Statutes Annotated ; D.C. Code ; Haw. Rev. Stat. 560:5-112, 560:5-318; Idaho Code Ann ; La. Code Civ. Proc. Ann. Art 4554; Mass. Gen. Laws Ann. ch. 190B, 5-311; Mich. Comp. Laws Ann a(x)]; Minn. Stat. Ann ; ; Mont. Code Ann ; Neb. Rev. Stat (c)]; N.M. Stat. Ann ; N.D. Cent. Code Ann (5-307); Or. Rev. Stat. Ann ; S.D. Codified Laws 29A A-5-509; Utah Code Ann (3); U.G.P.P.A. 318(c) (1997). 8 These states are: Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Colorado, District of Columbia, Hawaii, Idaho, Louisiana, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Montana, Nebraska, New Mexico, North Dakota, Oregon, South Dakota, and Utah. Ala. Code 26-2A- 110; Alaska Stat. Ann , ; Ariz. Rev. Stat. Ann ; Colorado Revised Statutes Annotated ; D.C. Code ; Haw. Rev. Stat. 560:5-112, 560:5-318; Idaho Code Ann ; La. Code Civ. Proc. Ann. Art 4554; Mass. Gen. Laws Ann. ch. 190B, 5-311; Mich. Comp. Laws Ann ; Minn. Stat. Ann ; Mont. Code Ann ; Neb. Rev. Stat ; N.M. Stat. Ann ; N.D. Cent. Code Ann (5-307); Or. Rev. Stat. Ann ; S.D. Codified Laws 29A A-5-509; Utah Code Ann ; Uniform Guardianship and Protective Proceedings Act 318(c) (1997). 9 Guardian s Rights and Responsibilities Series Article 6: Objections to Guardianship; Changing Guardians; Terminating Guardianship, Illinois Legal Aid, May 2006, D= Neb. Rev. Stat (6) (2011).

3 behalf of and in the best interest of the protected individual. Three states, Connecticut, Iowa, and Wyoming, limit the authority to petition for restoration to the individual under guardianship. 11 New Jersey limits authority to the individual and the guardian. 12 Upon the filing of a petition for restoration, 13 the court will set a date for a hearing on the issue of capacity, pursuant to the state s requirements. Some courts conduct a hearing immediately upon filing, so long as they find sufficient cause to warrant further proceedings. Other courts schedule a hearing only after it recieves a medical examination report from a court-appointed expert. Notice of the hearing is given to the guardian and the protected individual, and to other interested parties as required by the statute. After the hearing, the court may restore the individual s rights and terminate the guardianship if the burden of proof for capacity is met and the court deems restoration to be appropriate. The adjudication of restoration is grounds for terminating the guardianship. 14 The discharge of the guardian ends all rights and responsibilities of the guardianship, except for those involved in the winding up of the guardianship. EVIDENTIARY STANDARD The evidence considered in a guardianship hearing depends upon the guardianship laws of the state. The petitioner has the burden to show that the protected individual has capacity to manage personal or financial affairs such that guardianship is no longer necessary. 15 The burden then shifts to the party opposing restoration to prove the continuation of incapacity. Unlike in a petition for appointment of a guardian where the burden of proof is generally clear and convincing evidence, the standard in termination proceedings varies greatly and is often unclear. Under the UGPPA, once the petitioner establishes a prima facie case for termination the court shall order the termination unless the opposing party establishes by clear and convincing evidence that continuation of the guardianship is in the best interest of the protected individual. 16 The lower evidentiary standard of prima facie evidence for termination, as compared with the standard in an appointment for guardianship, is consistent with the Act s philosophy that a guardian should be appointed only for as long as necessary. In determining best interest, every effort should be made to determine the individual s personal values and desires. 17 Only two states, Minnesota and Maine, have adopted the UGPPA s prima facie evidentiary standard for restoration. Minnesota courts have interpreted this to mean evidence showing that 11 Conn. Gen. Stat. Ann. 45a-660(a)(1); Iowa Code Ann (1); Wyo. Stat. Ann (a) (stating that At any time, not less than six (6) months after the appointment of a guardian or conservator, the individual may petition the court alleging that he is no longer a proper subject of the guardianship or conservatorship and asking that the guardianship or conservatorship be terminated). 12 N.J. Stat. Ann. 3B: This is also possible upon the court s ruling sua sponte, although this is rare. 14 State ex rel. Nat. Bank of Commerce of Seattle v. Frater, 18 Wash. 2d 546, 140 P.2d 272 (Wash. 1943). 15 Ramirez v. Garcia de Bretado, 547 S.W.2d 717 (Tex. App. 1977); Harris v. Johnson, 149 Ind. App. 512, 273 N.E.2d 779 (Ind. Ct. App. 1971). 16 U.G.P.P.A. 318(c), 431(d) (1997). 17 U.G.P.P.A. 318 cmt. (1997).

4 the proof the guardianship was needed is no longer applicable. 18 In Maine, once a petitioner establishes a prima facie case that the individual has capacity, the burden shifts to the respondent to prove incapacity by clear and convincing evidence. 19 Seven states require the petitioner to prove by a preponderance of the evidence that the individual has sufficient capacity to manage his or her own affairs. 20 Eight states use the higher standard of clear and convincing evidence. 21 Mississippi requires such proof as the chancellor may deem sufficient. 22 Thirty-three states do not provide a specific evidentiary standard. 23 There is little case law in the area of restoration and it is not entirely clear what standard of proof should apply. Courts have taken different approaches. A circuit court case in Florida suggests that the standard is a preponderance of the evidence. 24 Cases in Ohio have found that the evidence presented need not be clear and convincing but need only ensure that the guardian s removal will serve the ward s best interests. 25 New Jersey cases suggest that the burden be clear and convincing. 26 Rhode Island does not set out an evidentiary standard. Rather, it requires the court to remove any guardian upon finding that the ward, based on a decision-making assessment tool directly in the statute, has the capacity to make decisions regarding his or her personal affairs. 27 The functional assessment tool is an all-encompassing evaluation of the individual s medical status, social assessment, mobility, social network, and financial matters to ease the court s decision-making regarding capacity. 18 Minn. Stat. Ann (2009); In re Guardianship of the Person of Meyer, 2010 WL (Minn. App. 2010); Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 18-A, 5-307(d) (2009). 19 Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 18-A, 5-307(d) (2009). 20 These seven states are: Connecticut, Georgia, Louisiana, Missouri, North Carolina, Texas, and Virginia. Conn. Gen. Stat. Ann. 45a-660; Haw Ga. Code Ann ; La. Code Civ. Proc. Ann. Art 4554; Mo. Ann. Stat ; N.C. Gen. Stat. Ann. 35A-1130; Tex. Prob. Code Ann. 694; Va. Code Ann These eight states are: Hawaii, Illinois, Iowa, Kansas, Nevada, Ohio, Oregon, and Pennsylvania. Rev. Stat. 560:5-112; 560:5-318; Illinois St. Ch. 5/11a-20; Iowa Code Ann ; Kan. Stat. Ann ; Nev. Rev. Stat. Ann , ; Ohio Rev. Code Ann ; Or. Rev. Stat. Ann ; 20 Pa. Cons. Stat. Ann Miss. Code. Ann The thirty three states that don t state an evidentiary standard are: Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Delaware, District of Columbia, Florida, Idaho, Indiana, Kentucky, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Montana, Nebraska, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Dakota, Oklahoma, Rhode Island, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Utah, Vermont, Washington, West Virginia, Wisconsin, and Wyoming. Ala. Code 26-2A-110; Alaska Stat. Ann , ; Ariz. Rev. Stat. Ann ; Ark. Code Ann ; Cal. Probate Code 1863(b); Colorado Revised Statutes Annotated ; Delaware Code Ann. tit ; D.C. Code ; Fla. Stat. Ann (3), ; Idaho Code Ann ; Ind. Code Ann ; Ky. Rev. Stat. Ann ; Md. Code Ann., Est. & Trusts ; Mass. Gen. Laws Ann. ch. 190B, 5-311; Mich. Comp. Laws Ann ; Mont. Code Ann ; Neb. Rev. Stat ; N.H. Rev. Stat. Ann. 464-A:40; N.J. Stat. Ann. 3B:12-28; N.M. Stat. Ann ; N.Y. Mental Hyg. Law 81.36; N.D. Cent. Code Ann (5-307); Okla. Stat. Ann. tit. 30, 3-116; R.I. Gen. Laws Ann ; S.C. Code Ann ; S.D. Codified Laws 29A A-5-509; Tenn. Code Ann ; Utah Code Ann ; Vt. Stat. Ann. tit. 14, 3077; Wash. Rev. Code Ann ; W. Va. Code Ann. 44A-4-7; Wis. Stat. Ann ; Wyo. Stat. Ann In re Guardianship of Branch, 10 FLW Supp. 23, 25 (2 nd Cir. 2002) (citing Beal Bank, SSB v. Almand & Associates, 780 So. 2d 45 (Fla. 2001) (establishing the presumptions and burden of proof required by banks to execute on accounts titled in the name of husband and wife who claimed the accounts were held as tenants by the entirety and therefore not subject to execution by the husbands judgment creditors). 25 In re Guardianship of Escola, 41 Ohio App. 3d 42, 44, 534 N.E. 2d 866 (Ohio Ct. App. 1987). 26 In re Rollins, 65 A.2d 667 (Mercer County Ct. 1949); In re Hazeltine, 119 N.J.Eq. 308, 182 A. 357 (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. 1936) 27 See R.I. Gen Laws Ann (2007).

5 In states without an express burden of proof, courts may simply use the same evidentiary standard as is used in a petition for guardianship, which is generally the high standard of clear and convincing evidence. But there is no research to substantiate this. Courts may be more inclined to use the same evidentiary standard when the statute expressly requires the court to follow the same procedural standards as in a petition for guardianship. Of the 18 states that require the court to follow the same procedural standards as in a petition for guardianship, only four expressly state an evidentiary burden of proof. 28 Minnesota requires prima facie, 29 Hawaii and Oregon require clear and convincing evidence after the petitioner establishes a prima facie case for termination, 30 and Louisiana s standard is a preponderance of the evidence. 31 The remaining 13 states that require the same procedures as in a petition for guardianship do not state an evidentiary standard. 32 The legislative intent is unclear. In spite of the variation and ambiguity, it is clear that at least eight states require courts to use a lesser burden of proof (either prima facie or preponderance of the evidence) in a petition for termination than in an initial petition for guardianship. There is no research to determine whether courts in these states may grant restoration more frequently. Due to the nature of the issues and the presumptions to be overcome, codifying an evidentiary standard can be an additional tool for states to protect the autonomy of the protected individual. MORITORIUM PERIODS ON FILING REQUESTS FOR REVIEW States may enact procedural bars to petitions for restoration. Eleven states permit courts to specify a minimum time period after the issue of the order adjudicating incapacity during which a petition for a review of the order may not be filed without special leave. 33 Of these states, eight require that the period not exceed one year, two require that it not exceed six months, and one state, Michigan, sets the maximum period at 182 days. While this may reduce frivolous and hasty attempts to remove a guardian, it could at the same time delay legitimate petitions for removal and restoration of rights. Four states specify a period during which a petition for reconsideration of a determination of incapacity cannot be filed, regardless of what the original order says. 34 Arizona precludes an interested person, other than the guardian or protected individual, from filing such a petition 28 These four states are: Minnesota, Hawaii, Oregon, and Louisiana. Minn. Stat. Ann ; Haw. Rev. Stat. 560:5-112, 560:5-318; Or. Rev. Stat. Ann ; La. Code Civ. Proc. Ann. Art Minn. Stat. Ann Haw. Rev. Stat. 560:5-112, 560:5-318; Or. Rev. Stat. Ann La. Code Civ. Proc. Ann. Art These thirteen states are: Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Colorado, District of Columbia, Idaho, Massachusetts, Montana, Nebraska, New Mexico, North Dakota, South Dakota, and Utah. Ala. Code 26-2A-110; Alaska Stat. Ann , ; Ariz. Rev. Stat. Ann ; Colorado Revised Statutes Annotated ; D.C. Code ; Idaho Code Ann ; Mass. Gen. Laws Ann. ch. 190B, 5-311; Mont. Code Ann ; Neb. Rev. Stat , ; N.M. Stat. Ann ; N.D. Cent. Code Ann (5-307); S.D. Codified Laws 29A A-5-509; Utah Code Ann These eleven states are: Alabama, Hawaii, Idaho, Indiana, Massachusetts, Michigan, Montana, Nebraska, New Hampshire, South Carolina, and Utah. Ala. Code 26-2A-110; Haw. Rev. Stat. 560:5-112, 560:5-318; Idaho Code Ann ; Ind. Code Ann ; Mass. Gen. Laws Ann. ch. 190B, 5-311; Mich. Comp. Laws Ann ; Mont. Code Ann ; Neb. Rev. Stat ; N.H. Rev. Stat. Ann. 464-A:40; S.C. Code Ann ; Utah Code Ann These four states are: Arizona, Iowa, Texas, and Wyoming. Ariz. Rev. Stat. Ann ; Iowa Code Ann ; Tex. Prob. Code Ann. 694; Wyo. Stat. Ann

6 within one year of the order adjudicating incapacity unless the court believes that the individual is no longer incapacitated. 35 Texas expands the one-year period to apply to any person. 36 Iowa and Wyoming preclude the filing of any petition for termination within six months of the denial of a former petition for termination. 37 Other states don t place any limitations on the time in which a petitioner may file a request for restoration. For example, California permits the guardian to petition the court at any time for a hearing to challenge the guardianship on the basis that he or she no longer meets the legal criteria. 38 PROCEDURAL SAFEGUARDS As a practical matter, the only way an individual can end a guardianship against the wishes of the guardian is by initiating a contested court proceeding. 39 Under the UGPPA and in similar jurisdictions, once a guardian has been appointed, the court will ordinarily act only if a moving party so requests. 40 Twenty states and the UGPPA expressly permit the petitioner to informally communicate a request for restoration instead of filing a formal application. 41 Individuals need not secure counsel to file an informal petition. This makes the judicial process more accessible by reducing procedural barriers to filing, such as cost and time, which may deter interested parties from taking action. 42 However, it would be critical for the individual to secure counsel should the petition proceed further. 43 As an additional safeguard, 17 states expressly bar willful interference with a request for restoration to the court. 44 The court may hold any person who knowingly interferes with the transmission to be in contempt of court. This reflects certain guardianship policy to promote open lines of communication directly between the court and the protected individual. Colorado specifically targets the guardian, stating that the fiduciary shall not take an active role opposing or interfering with a proceeding for restoration initiated by the protected individual Ariz. Rev. Stat. Ann (C) (2012). 36 See Tex. Prob. Code Ann. 694A(e) (2005). 37 See Iowa Code Ann (1963); Wyo. Stat. Ann (1977). 38 Cal. Probate Code Cavey, supra note 40, at U.G.G.P.A. 414(1997). 41 These twenty states are: Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, District of Columbia, Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, Kentucky, Maine, Massachusetts, Michigan, Montana, Nebraska, New Hampshire, New Mexico, North Dakota, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, and Utah. Ala. Code 26-2A-110; Alaska Stat. Ann , ; Ariz. Rev. Stat. Ann ; D.C. Code ; Idaho Code Ann ; Illinois St. Ch. 5/11a-20; Ind. Code Ann ; Ky. Rev. Stat. Ann ; Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 18-A, 5-307(d); Mass. Gen. Laws Ann. ch. 190B, 5-311; Mich. Comp. Laws Ann ; Mont. Code Ann ; Neb. Rev. Stat ; N.H. Rev. Stat. Ann. 464-A:40; N.M. Stat. Ann ; N.D. Cent. Code Ann (5-307); S.C. Code Ann ; Tenn. Code Ann ; Tex. Prob. Code Ann. 694; Utah Code Ann ; U.G.G.P.A. 318 cmt. (1997). 42 Mary Joy Quinn & Howard S. Krooks, The Relationship Between the Guardian and the Court, 2012 Utah L. Rev. 1611, 1638 (2012). 43 See Patricia M. Cavey, Realizing the Right to Counsel in Guardianship: Dispelling Guardianship Myths, 2 Marq. Elder s Advisor 5 (2000). 44 These seventeen states are: Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, District of Columbia, Idaho, Indiana, Maine, Massachusetts, Michigan, Montana, Nebraska, New Hampshire, New Mexico, North Dakota, South Carolina, Texas, and Utah. Ala. Code 26-2A-110; Alaska Stat. Ann , ; Ariz. Rev. Stat. Ann ; D.C. Code ; Idaho Code Ann ; Ind. Code Ann ; Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 18-A, 5-307(d); Mass. Gen. Laws Ann. ch. 190B, 5-311; Mich. Comp. Laws Ann ; Mont. Code Ann ; Neb. Rev. Stat ; N.H. Rev. Stat. Ann A:40; N.M. Stat. Ann ; N.D. Cent. Code Ann (5-307); S.C. Code Ann ; Tex. Prob. Code Ann. 694; Utah Code Ann See Colorado Revised Statutes Annotated (3.5)(c).

7 However, the guardian may file a report on matters relevant to the termination proceeding, and may file a motion for instructions regarding the appointment of an attorney or visitor, investigations to be conducted, and the guardian s involvement in the proceedings. 46 The UGPPA does not contain a similar provision. These procedural safeguards permitting informal requests for restoration and sanctions for interference with such requests increase accessibility to the judicial process independent of the guardian. Seventeen states have codified both protections. 47 Thirty-one statutes do not include either protection. 48 This high number may cause concern because, the relationship between the guardian and the court is generally seen as a critical partnership that supports the incapacitated person who cannot support himself. 49 However, general statutory provisions requiring guardians to act in the best interest of the individual and the common law likely apply in this context. The common law impliedly allows a guardian to oppose a petition for restoration so long as the guardian acts reasonably and in good faith. 50 It recognizes that opposing a motion for restoration does not necessarily create a conflict of interest. 51 The guardian s general duty of loyalty to the protected individual may require the guardian to oppose a petition for restoration where it is clear the individual has not regained capacity. 52 Following appointment of a guardian, courts have an on-going responsibility to ensure that the terms of the order remain consistent with the respondent s needs and conditions. 53 Due to possible changes in capacity, periodic assessment of capacity is necessary to determine whether guardianship is still necessary. Courts generally receive annual guardianship reports with updates of the protected individual s condition, and can often impose additional requirements on the guardian to provide more frequent or more detailed reports. 54 Submitting an annual report forces the guardian to stop and think directly about the often elusive issue of the individual s capacity. 46 See id (3.5)(a). 47 The seventeen states that contain both provisions are: Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, District of Columbia, Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, Maine, Massachusetts, Michigan, Montana, Nebraska, New Hampshire, New Mexico, North Dakota, South Carolina, Texas, and Utah. Ala. Code 26-2A-110; Alaska Stat. Ann , ; Ariz. Rev. Stat. Ann ; D.C. Code ; Idaho Code Ann ; Illinois St. Ch. 5/11a-20; Ind. Code Ann ; Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 18-A, 5-307(d); Mass. Gen. Laws Ann. ch. 190B, 5-311; Mich. Comp. Laws Ann ; Mont. Code Ann ; Neb. Rev. Stat ; N.H. Rev. Stat. Ann. 464-A:40; N.M. Stat. Ann ; N.D. Cent. Code Ann (5-307); S.C. Code Ann ; Tex. Prob. Code Ann. 694; Utah Code Ann These thirty one states are: Arkansas, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Hawaii, Iowa, Kansas, Louisiana, Maryland, Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri, Nevada, New Jersey, New York, North Carolina, Ohio, Oklahoma, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Dakota, Vermont, Virginia, Washington, West Virginia, Wisconsin, and Wyoming. Ark. Code Ann , ; Cal. Probate Code 1863(b); Colorado Revised Statutes Annotated ; Conn. Gen. Stat. Ann. 45a-660; Delaware Code Ann. tit ; Fla. Stat. Ann (3), ; Ga. Code Ann ; Haw. Rev. Stat. 560:5-112, 560:5-318; Iowa Code Ann ; Kan. Stat. Ann ; La. Code Civ. Proc. Ann. Art 4554; Md. Code Ann., Est. & Trusts ; Minn. Stat. Ann ; Miss. Code. Ann ; Mo. Ann. Stat ; Nev. Rev. Stat. Ann , ; N.J. Stat. Ann. 3B:12-28; N.Y. Mental Hyg. Law 81.36; N.C. Gen. Stat. Ann. 35A-1130; Ohio Rev. Code Ann ; Okla. Stat. Ann. tit. 30, 3-116; Or. Rev. Stat. Ann ; 20 Pa. Cons. Stat. Ann. 5517; R.I. Gen. Laws Ann ; S.D. Codified Laws 29A A-5-509; Vt. Stat. Ann. tit. 14, 3077; Va. Code Ann ; Wash. Rev. Code Ann ; W. Va. Code Ann. 44A-4-7; Wis. Stat. Ann ; Wyo. Stat. Ann Quinn & Krooks, supra note 39, at See Estate of Keenan v. Colorado State Bank & Trust, 252 P.3 rd 539 (Colo. App. 2011). 51 Id. 52 See id. 53 Report, Richard Van Duizend, National Probate Court Standards, National Center for State Courts (2013). 54 Reporting Requirements, Center for Elders and the Court, ianship- Monitoring.aspx (last visited July 2, 2013).

8 It can also be an opportunity for discussion and input from the protected individual and interested parties about the continued need for guardianship. Three states, Connecticut, Missouri, and New Mexico, require the court itself to periodically analyze whether the individual s circumstances have changed sufficiently to justify termination of the guardianship and restoration of rights. 55 Connecticut requires the court to conduct a review not later than one year after the conservatorship was ordered and not less than every three years after such initial one-year review. 56 Missouri requires that that court inquire into the status of every protected individual at least annually, to determine whether the incapacity may have ceased. 57 New Mexico requires the court to hold a status hearing to review the continued need for a guardian at any time following the appointment of a guardian, but not later than ten years after the initial appointment of a guardian for a protected person and every ten years thereafter. 58 These states provide additional oversight to the protected individual because the mental capacity of the individual is periodically and regularly assessed by the court, regardless of whether a petition for restoration is filed. DUTIES OF THE GUARDIAN AND RIGHTS OF THE INDIVIDUAL The authority and responsibility of a guardian terminates when the individual s rights are restored. 59 Generally, in a termination proceeding the guardian must submit a final report of the individual s status and actions taken on his or her behalf, as well as a final accounting of the estate assets for the court s review and approval. 60 While states require a periodic status report from the guardian, some statutes impose additional reporting duties upon a change in the individual s capacity. Three states expressly require the guardian to immediately notify the court if the incapacitated individual s condition has changed. 61 This is consistent with existing standards that call attention to a guardian s duty to report to the court should a change in capacity occur. 62 The UGPPA states that, the guardian shall immediately notify the court if the ward s condition has changed so that the individual is capable of exercising rights previously removed. 63 The National Guardianship Association Standards of Practice requires the guardian to promptly inform the court of any change in the capacity of the person that warrants a restriction of the guardian s authority These three states are: Connecticut, Missouri, and New Mexico. Conn. Gen. Stat. Ann. 45a-660; Mo. Ann. Stat ; N.M. Stat. Ann Conn. Gen. Stat. Ann. 45a-660(c) (2007). 57 Mo. Ann. Stat (1) (1985). 58 N.M. Stat. Ann (G) (2009). 59 Except for filing final reports, accounting, turning over assets, and other final duties required by law in the wrapping up of the guardianship. See Uniform Guardianship and Protective Proceedings Act 318; 431 (1997); A Texas Guide to Adult Guardianship, The Texas Department of Aging and Disability Services, DADS Media Services 11P372, April 2011, at 30, available at b395-guardianship.pdf. 60 See supra note 41 at p These three states are: Colorado, Oklahoma, and Wyoming. Colorado Revised Statutes Annotated ; Okla. Stat. Ann. tit. 30, 3-118(C); Wyo. Stat. Ann (xi)]. 62 These standards include the National Probate Court Standards (NPCS), the Uniform Guardianship and Protective Proceedings Act (UGPPA), and the National Guardianship Association Standards of Practice (NGA). 63 U.G.P.P.A. 314(b)(5) (1997). 64 The 2011 Third National Guardianship Summit, comprised of ten National Guardianship Network organizations, developed new standards which are incorporated into the 2013 edition of the NGA Standards of Practice for Guardians; NGA Standards of Practice for Guardians, Standard No. 1.4 (Third Nat l Guardianship Summit: Standards of Excellence 2011).

9 Similarly, Rule 6 of The Model Code of Ethics for Guardians states that, the guardian has an affirmative obligation to seek termination or limitation of the guardianship whenever indicated. 65 (Emphasis added). The Rule also states that, the guardian shall diligently seek out information which will provide a basis for termination or limitation of the guardianship, and shall promptly notify the court upon any indication that termination is warranted. 66 While The Model Code and The National Guardianship Standards of Practice are not law, they are in line with the policy of guardianship law to protect the interest of the individual and work towards the regaining of capacity. Only three states have codified the right to restoration at the earliest possible time. Florida, Georgia, and Michigan expressly state that the individual has the right to have their autonomy and rights restored at the earliest possible time. 67 This begs the question: What is the earliest possible time? And what do courts do in practice to determine the earliest possible time? There is little data or literature to provide an easy answer. CONCLUSION This statutory review is an initial examination of current state law on restoration of rights in the termination of adult guardianships. There are many unknowns, including the number of petitions for restoration that are filed in each jurisdiction and the number of petitions granted. In light of the findings in this paper, there is a compelling need for additional research and data collection to determine which state practices adequately protect the individual s right to restoration. Eighteen states and the UGPPA apply the same procedures used in an appointment of a guardian to a petition for termination and restoration. In these states, the barriers to establishing a guardianship are equally as challenging to overcome in restoring rights to an individual who has regained capacity. Adults with capacity are constitutionally guaranteed certain fundamental rights yet only three states expressly state that the protected individual has the right to be restored at the earliest possible time. All but three states provide broad permission for any interested party to petition for restoration, yet states vary as to the burden of proof that the petitioner must meet. Depending on the level of burden, the evidentiary standard acts as either a barrier to restoration or a guard to protect the right to restoration. Two states and the UGPPA require the relatively low standard of prima facie evidence. Seven states use a preponderance of the evidence standard, and eight states use the higher standard of clear and convincing evidence. Thirty three states do not expressly provide an evidentiary standard, leaving courts to determine the adequacy of evidence and the appropriate bars to restoration. It s unclear whether more restorations occur in states that codify detailed restoration procedure and protections. Twenty states and the UGPPA permit an informal request for restoration. Seventeen states permit the court to hold any person who knowingly interferes with a petition for restoration to be held in contempt of court. Thirty one states do not include either protection. Further, it is unknown whether in practice such detailed procedural requirements lead to more 65 Model Code of Ethics for Guardians Rule 6 (1988). 66 Id. Rule 6.1, Rule Fla. Stat. Ann ; Ga. Code Ann (A)(7); 7 Mich. Comp. Laws Ann a(ee).

10 petitions for restoration. A second phase of this study, including a restoration case law summary and intensive reviews of probate court procedure in jurisdictions with exemplary practices, is necessary to document and articulate restoration practices for replication across the United States.

Elder Financial Abuse and State Mandatory Reporting Laws for Financial Institutions Prepared by CUNA s State Government Affairs

Elder Financial Abuse and State Mandatory Reporting Laws for Financial Institutions Prepared by CUNA s State Government Affairs Elder Financial Abuse and State Mandatory Reporting Laws for Financial Institutions Prepared by CUNA s State Government Affairs Overview Financial crimes and exploitation can involve the illegal or improper

More information

Section 4. Table of State Court Authorities Governing Judicial Adjuncts and Comparison Between State Rules and Fed. R. Civ. P. 53

Section 4. Table of State Court Authorities Governing Judicial Adjuncts and Comparison Between State Rules and Fed. R. Civ. P. 53 Section 4. Table of State Court Authorities Governing Judicial Adjuncts and Comparison Between State Rules and Fed. R. Civ. P. 53 This chart originally appeared in Lynn Jokela & David F. Herr, Special

More information

Survey of State Laws on Credit Unions Incidental Powers

Survey of State Laws on Credit Unions Incidental Powers Survey of State Laws on Credit Unions Incidental Powers Alabama Ala. Code 5-17-4(10) To exercise incidental powers as necessary to enable it to carry on effectively the purposes for which it is incorporated

More information

Name Change Laws. Current as of February 23, 2017

Name Change Laws. Current as of February 23, 2017 Name Change Laws Current as of February 23, 2017 MAP relies on the research conducted by the National Center for Transgender Equality for this map and the statutes found below. Alabama An applicant must

More information

RESTORATION IN ADULT GUARDIANSHIPS (STATUTES)

RESTORATION IN ADULT GUARDIANSHIPS (STATUTES) RESTORATION IN ADULT GUARDIANSHIPS (STATUTES) June 2013 All fifty states have enacted laws addressing termination of adult guardianship upon the individual s regaining capacity. A number of statutes are

More information

Laws Governing Data Security and Privacy U.S. Jurisdictions at a Glance UPDATED MARCH 30, 2015

Laws Governing Data Security and Privacy U.S. Jurisdictions at a Glance UPDATED MARCH 30, 2015 Laws Governing Data Security and Privacy U.S. Jurisdictions at a Glance UPDATED MARCH 30, 2015 State Statute Year Statute Alabama* Ala. Information Technology Policy 685-00 (Applicable to certain Executive

More information

APPENDIX C STATE UNIFORM TRUST CODE STATUTES

APPENDIX C STATE UNIFORM TRUST CODE STATUTES APPENDIX C STATE UNIFORM TRUST CODE STATUTES 122 STATE STATE UNIFORM TRUST CODE STATUTES CITATION Alabama Ala. Code 19-3B-101 19-3B-1305 Arkansas Ark. Code Ann. 28-73-101 28-73-1106 District of Columbia

More information

States Permitting Or Prohibiting Mutual July respondent in the same action.

States Permitting Or Prohibiting Mutual July respondent in the same action. Alabama No Code of Ala. 30-5-5 (c)(1) A court may issue mutual protection orders only if a separate petition has been filed by each party. Alaska No Alaska Stat. 18.66.130(b) A court may not grant protective

More information

Statutes of Limitations for the 50 States (and the District of Columbia)

Statutes of Limitations for the 50 States (and the District of Columbia) s of Limitations in All 50 s Nolo.com Page 6 of 14 Updated September 18, 2015 The chart below contains common statutes of limitations for all 50 states, expressed in years. We provide this chart as a rough

More information

APPENDIX D STATE PERPETUITIES STATUTES

APPENDIX D STATE PERPETUITIES STATUTES APPENDIX D STATE PERPETUITIES STATUTES 218 STATE PERPETUITIES STATUTES State Citation PERMITS PERPETUAL TRUSTS Alaska Alaska Stat. 34.27.051, 34.27.100 Delaware 25 Del. C. 503 District of Columbia D.C.

More information

Survey of State Civil Shoplifting Statutes

Survey of State Civil Shoplifting Statutes University of Nebraska - Lincoln DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln College of Law, Faculty Publications Law, College of 2015 Survey of State Civil Shoplifting Statutes Ryan Sullivan University

More information

States Adopt Emancipation Day Deadline for Individual Returns; Some Opt Against Allowing Delay for Corporate Returns in 2012

States Adopt Emancipation Day Deadline for Individual Returns; Some Opt Against Allowing Delay for Corporate Returns in 2012 Source: Weekly State Tax Report: News Archive > 2012 > 03/16/2012 > Perspective > States Adopt Deadline for Individual Returns; Some Opt Against Allowing Delay for Corporate Returns in 2012 2012 TM-WSTR

More information

Accountability-Sanctions

Accountability-Sanctions Accountability-Sanctions Education Commission of the States 700 Broadway, Suite 801 Denver, CO 80203-3460 303.299.3600 Fax: 303.296.8332 www.ecs.org Student Accountability Initiatives By Michael Colasanti

More information

CA CALIFORNIA. Ala. Code 10-2B (2009) [Transferred, effective January 1, 2011, to 10A ] No monetary penalties listed.

CA CALIFORNIA. Ala. Code 10-2B (2009) [Transferred, effective January 1, 2011, to 10A ] No monetary penalties listed. AL ALABAMA Ala. Code 10-2B-15.02 (2009) [Transferred, effective January 1, 2011, to 10A-2-15.02.] No monetary penalties listed. May invalidate in-state contracts made by unqualified foreign corporations.

More information

Laws Governing Data Security and Privacy U.S. Jurisdictions at a Glance

Laws Governing Data Security and Privacy U.S. Jurisdictions at a Glance Laws Governing Security and Privacy U.S. Jurisdictions at a Glance State Statute Year Statute Adopted or Significantly Revised Alabama* ALA. INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY POLICY 685-00 (applicable to certain

More information

State Statutory Provisions Addressing Mutual Protection Orders

State Statutory Provisions Addressing Mutual Protection Orders State Statutory Provisions Addressing Mutual Protection Orders Revised 2014 National Center on Protection Orders and Full Faith & Credit 1901 North Fort Myer Drive, Suite 1011 Arlington, Virginia 22209

More information

STATUTES OF REPOSE. Presented by 2-10 Home Buyers Warranty on behalf of the National Association of Home Builders.

STATUTES OF REPOSE. Presented by 2-10 Home Buyers Warranty on behalf of the National Association of Home Builders. STATUTES OF Know your obligation as a builder. Educating yourself on your state s statutes of repose can help protect your business in the event of a defect. Presented by 2-10 Home Buyers Warranty on behalf

More information

State Prescription Monitoring Program Statutes and Regulations List

State Prescription Monitoring Program Statutes and Regulations List State Prescription Monitoring Program Statutes and Regulations List 1 Research Current through May 2016. This project was supported by Grant No. G1599ONDCP03A, awarded by the Office of National Drug Control

More information

WORLD TRADE ORGANIZATION

WORLD TRADE ORGANIZATION Page D-1 ANNEX D REQUEST FOR THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A PANEL BY ANTIGUA AND BARBUDA WORLD TRADE ORGANIZATION WT/DS285/2 13 June 2003 (03-3174) Original: English UNITED STATES MEASURES AFFECTING THE CROSS-BORDER

More information

EXCEPTIONS: WHAT IS ADMISSIBLE?

EXCEPTIONS: WHAT IS ADMISSIBLE? Alabama ALA. CODE 12-21- 203 any relating to the past sexual behavior of the complaining witness CIRCUMSTANCE F when it is found that past sexual behavior directly involved the participation of the accused

More information

National State Law Survey: Mistake of Age Defense 1

National State Law Survey: Mistake of Age Defense 1 1 State 1 Is there a buyerapplicable trafficking or CSEC law? 2 Does a buyerapplicable trafficking or CSEC law expressly prohibit a mistake of age defense in prosecutions for buying a commercial sex act

More information

Relationship Between Adult and Minor Guardianship Statutes

Relationship Between Adult and Minor Guardianship Statutes RELATIONSHIP DEFINITION STATES TOTAL Integrated Statutory provisions regarding authority over personal AR, DE, FL, IN, IA, KS, KY, MO, NV, NC, OH, OR, 17 matters are applicable to both adults and minors

More information

Governance State Boards/Chiefs/Agencies

Governance State Boards/Chiefs/Agencies Governance State Boards/Chiefs/Agencies Education Commission of the States 700 Broadway, Suite 1200 Denver, CO 80203-3460 303.299.3600 Fax: 303.296.8332 www.ecs.org Qualifications for Chief State School

More information

National State Law Survey: Expungement and Vacatur Laws 1

National State Law Survey: Expungement and Vacatur Laws 1 1 State 1 Is expungement or sealing permitted for juvenile records? 2 Does state law contain a vacatur provision that could apply to victims of human trafficking? Does the vacatur provision apply to juvenile

More information

H.R and the Protection of State Conscience Rights for Pro-Life Healthcare Workers. November 4, 2009 * * * * *

H.R and the Protection of State Conscience Rights for Pro-Life Healthcare Workers. November 4, 2009 * * * * * H.R. 3962 and the Protection of State Conscience Rights for Pro-Life Healthcare Workers November 4, 2009 * * * * * Upon a careful review of H.R. 3962, there is a concern that the bill does not adequately

More information

Page 1 of 5. Appendix A.

Page 1 of 5. Appendix A. STATE Alabama Alaska Arizona Arkansas California Colorado Connecticut District of Columbia Delaware CONSUMER PROTECTION ACTS and PERSONAL INFORMATION PROTECTION ACTS Alabama Deceptive Trade Practices Act,

More information

Teacher Tenure: Teacher Due Process Rights to Continued Employment

Teacher Tenure: Teacher Due Process Rights to Continued Employment Alabama legislated Three school Incompetency, insubordination, neglect of duty, immorality, failure to perform duties in a satisfactory manner, justifiable decrease in the number of teaching positions,

More information

State By State Survey:

State By State Survey: Connecticut California Florida By Survey: Statutes of Limitations and Repose for Construction - Related Claims The Right Choice for Policyholders www.sdvlaw.com Statutes of Limitations and Repose 2 Statutes

More information

Representation and Investigation in Guardianship Proceedings (as of statutory revisions December 31, 2016)

Representation and Investigation in Guardianship Proceedings (as of statutory revisions December 31, 2016) UGPPA 305(b), 406(b) Alt 1: If requested by respondent, recommended by visitor, or court determines need for representation Alt. 2: Shall appoint 115 If representation is otherwise inadequate 305(a), 406(a)

More information

State P3 Legislation Matrix 1

State P3 Legislation Matrix 1 State P3 Legislation Matrix 1 Alabama Alaska Arizona Arkansas 2 Article 2: State Department of Ala. Code 23-1-40 Article 3: Public Roads, Bridges, and Ferries Ala. Code 23-1-80 to 23-1-95 Toll Road, Bridge

More information

If it hasn t happened already, at some point

If it hasn t happened already, at some point An Introduction to Obtaining Out-of-State Discovery in State and Federal Court Litigation by Brenda M. Johnson If it hasn t happened already, at some point in your practice you will be faced with the prospect

More information

State-by-State Lien Matrix

State-by-State Lien Matrix Alabama Yes Upon notification by the court of the security transfer, lien claimant has ten days to challenge the sufficiency of the bond amount or the surety. The court s determination is final. 1 Lien

More information

If you have questions, please or call

If you have questions, please  or call SCCE's 17th Annual Compliance & Ethics Institute: CLE Approvals By State The SCCE submitted sessions deemed eligible for general CLE credits and legal ethics CLE credits to most states with CLE requirements

More information

INSTITUTE of PUBLIC POLICY

INSTITUTE of PUBLIC POLICY INSTITUTE of PUBLIC POLICY Harry S Truman School of Public Affairs University of Missouri ANALYSIS OF STATE REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES Andrew Wesemann and Brian Dabson Summary This report analyzes state

More information

The Victim Rights Law Center thanks Catherine Cambridge for her research assistance.

The Victim Rights Law Center thanks Catherine Cambridge for her research assistance. The Victim Rights Law Center thanks Catherine Cambridge for her research assistance. Privilege and Communication Between Professionals Summary of Research Findings Question Addressed: Which jurisdictions

More information

REPORTS AND REFERRALS TO LAW ENFORCEMENT: PROVISIONS AND CITATIONS IN ADULT PROTECTIVE SERVICES LAWS, BY STATE

REPORTS AND REFERRALS TO LAW ENFORCEMENT: PROVISIONS AND CITATIONS IN ADULT PROTECTIVE SERVICES LAWS, BY STATE REPORTS AND REFERRALS TO LAW ENFORCEMENT: PROVISIONS AND CITATIONS IN ADULT PROTECTIVE SERVICES LAWS, BY STATE (Laws current as of 12/31/06) Prepared by Lori Stiegel and Ellen Klem of the American Bar

More information

ANIMAL CRUELTY STATE LAW SUMMARY CHART: Court-Ordered Programs for Animal Cruelty Offenses

ANIMAL CRUELTY STATE LAW SUMMARY CHART: Court-Ordered Programs for Animal Cruelty Offenses The chart below is a summary of the relevant portions of state animal cruelty laws that provide for court-ordered evaluation, counseling, treatment, prevention, and/or educational programs. The full text

More information

Employee must be. provide reasonable notice (Ala. Code 1975, ).

Employee must be. provide reasonable notice (Ala. Code 1975, ). State Amount of Leave Required Notice by Employee Compensation Exclusions and Other Provisions Alabama Time necessary to vote, not exceeding one hour. Employer hours. (Ala. Code 1975, 17-1-5.) provide

More information

THE 2010 AMENDMENTS TO UCC ARTICLE 9

THE 2010 AMENDMENTS TO UCC ARTICLE 9 THE 2010 AMENDMENTS TO UCC ARTICLE 9 STATE ENACTMENT VARIATIONS INCLUDES ALL STATE ENACTMENTS Prepared by Paul Hodnefield Associate General Counsel Corporation Service Company 2015 Corporation Service

More information

THE PROCESS TO RENEW A JUDGMENT SHOULD BEGIN 6-8 MONTHS PRIOR TO THE DEADLINE

THE PROCESS TO RENEW A JUDGMENT SHOULD BEGIN 6-8 MONTHS PRIOR TO THE DEADLINE THE PROCESS TO RENEW A JUDGMENT SHOULD BEGIN 6-8 MONTHS PRIOR TO THE DEADLINE STATE RENEWAL Additional information ALABAMA Judgment good for 20 years if renewed ALASKA ARIZONA (foreign judgment 4 years)

More information

Electronic Notarization

Electronic Notarization Electronic Notarization Legal Disclaimer: Although a good faith attempt has been made to make this table as complete as possible, it is still subject to human error and constantly changing laws. It should

More information

Authorizing Automated Vehicle Platooning

Authorizing Automated Vehicle Platooning Authorizing Automated Vehicle Platooning A Guide for State Legislators By Marc Scribner July 2016 ISSUE ANALYSIS 2016 NO. 5 Authorizing Automated Vehicle Platooning A Guide for State Legislators By Marc

More information

You are working on the discovery plan for

You are working on the discovery plan for A Look at the Law Obtaining Out-of-State Evidence for State Court Civil Litigation: Where to Start? You are working on the discovery plan for your case, brainstorming the evidence that you need to prosecute

More information

Time Off To Vote State-by-State

Time Off To Vote State-by-State Time Off To Vote State-by-State Page Applicable Laws and Regulations 1 Time Allowed 7 Must Employee Be Paid? 11 Must Employee Apply? 13 May Employer Specify Hours? 16 Prohibited Acts 18 Penalties 27 State

More information

UNIFORM NOTICE OF REGULATION A TIER 2 OFFERING Pursuant to Section 18(b)(3), (b)(4), and/or (c)(2) of the Securities Act of 1933

UNIFORM NOTICE OF REGULATION A TIER 2 OFFERING Pursuant to Section 18(b)(3), (b)(4), and/or (c)(2) of the Securities Act of 1933 Item 1. Issuer s Identity UNIFORM NOTICE OF REGULATION A TIER 2 OFFERING Pursuant to Section 18(b)(3), (b)(4), and/or (c)(2) of the Securities Act of 1933 Name of Issuer Previous Name(s) None Entity Type

More information

STATE PRESCRIPTION MONITORING STATUTES AND REGULATIONS LIST

STATE PRESCRIPTION MONITORING STATUTES AND REGULATIONS LIST STATE PRESCRIPTION MONITORING STATUTES AND REGULATIONS LIST Research Current through June 2014. This project was supported by Grant No. G1399ONDCP03A, awarded by the Office of National Drug Control Policy.

More information

Role of Clinical Evaluation Professionals in Adult Guardianship Proceedings: Survey of State Statutes

Role of Clinical Evaluation Professionals in Adult Guardianship Proceedings: Survey of State Statutes Role of Clinical Evaluation Professionals in Adult Guardianship Proceedings: Survey of State Statutes State & Citation Uniform Guardianship and Protective Proceedings Act of 1997 306 Alabama Code 26-2A-102(b)

More information

Right to Try: It s More Complicated Than You Think

Right to Try: It s More Complicated Than You Think Vol. 14, No. 8, August 2018 Happy Trials to You Right to Try: It s More Complicated Than You Think By David Vulcano A dying patient who desperately wants to try an experimental medication cares about speed,

More information

PERMISSIBILITY OF ELECTRONIC VOTING IN THE UNITED STATES. Member Electronic Vote/ . Alabama No No Yes No. Alaska No No No No

PERMISSIBILITY OF ELECTRONIC VOTING IN THE UNITED STATES. Member Electronic Vote/  . Alabama No No Yes No. Alaska No No No No PERMISSIBILITY OF ELECTRONIC VOTING IN THE UNITED STATES State Member Conference Call Vote Member Electronic Vote/ Email Board of Directors Conference Call Vote Board of Directors Electronic Vote/ Email

More information

STATE STANDARDS FOR EMERGENCY EVALUATION

STATE STANDARDS FOR EMERGENCY EVALUATION STATE STANDARDS FOR EMERGENCY EVALUATION UPDATED: JULY 2018 200 NORTH GLEBE ROAD, SUITE 801 ARLINGTON, VIRGINIA 22203 (703) 294-6001 TreatmentAdvocacyCenter.org Alabama ALA. CODE 22-52-91(a). When a law

More information

DEFINED TIMEFRAMES FOR RATE CASES (i.e., suspension period)

DEFINED TIMEFRAMES FOR RATE CASES (i.e., suspension period) STATE Alabama Alaska Arizona Arkansas California Colorado DEFINED TIMEFRAMES FOR RATE CASES (i.e., suspension period) 6 months. Ala. Code 37-1-81. Using the simplified Operating Margin Method, however,

More information

State Data Breach Laws

State Data Breach Laws State Data Breach Laws 1 Alaska Personal information means a combination of (A) an individual s name;... and (B) one or more of the following information elements: (i) the individual s social security

More information

According to the Bureau of Justice Statistics, guilty pleas in 1996 accounted for 91

According to the Bureau of Justice Statistics, guilty pleas in 1996 accounted for 91 U.S. Department of Justice Office of Justice Programs Office for Victims of Crime NOVEMBER 2002 Victim Input Into Plea Agreements LEGAL SERIES #7 BULLETIN Message From the Director Over the past three

More information

2016 us election results

2016 us election results 1 of 6 11/12/2016 7:35 PM 2016 us election results All News Images Videos Shopping More Search tools About 243,000,000 results (0.86 seconds) 2 WA OR NV CA AK MT ID WY UT CO AZ NM ND MN SD WI NY MI NE

More information

Appendix 6 Right of Publicity

Appendix 6 Right of Publicity Last Updated: July 2016 Appendix 6 Right of Publicity Common-Law State Statute Rights Survives Death Alabama Yes Yes 55 Years After Death (only applies to soldiers and survives soldier s death) Alaska

More information

2016 Voter Registration Deadlines by State

2016 Voter Registration Deadlines by State 2016 Voter s by Alabama 10/24/2016 https://www.alabamavotes.gov/electioninfo.aspx?m=vote rs Alaska 10/9/2016 (Election Day registration permitted for purpose of voting for president and Vice President

More information

WYOMING POPULATION DECLINED SLIGHTLY

WYOMING POPULATION DECLINED SLIGHTLY FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Wednesday, December 19, 2018 Contact: Dr. Wenlin Liu, Chief Economist WYOMING POPULATION DECLINED SLIGHTLY CHEYENNE -- Wyoming s total resident population contracted to 577,737 in

More information

Matthew Miller, Bureau of Legislative Research

Matthew Miller, Bureau of Legislative Research Matthew Miller, Bureau of Legislative Research Arkansas (reelection) Georgia (reelection) Idaho (reelection) Kentucky (reelection) Michigan (partisan nomination - reelection) Minnesota (reelection) Mississippi

More information

Chart 12.7: State Appellate Court Divisions (Cross-reference ALWD Rule 12.6(b)(2))

Chart 12.7: State Appellate Court Divisions (Cross-reference ALWD Rule 12.6(b)(2)) Chart 12.7: State Appellate Court (Cross-reference ALWD Rule 12.6(b)(2)) Alabama Divided Court of Civil Appeals Court of Criminal Appeals Alaska Not applicable Not applicable Arizona Divided** Court of

More information

We re Paying Dearly for Bush s Tax Cuts Study Shows Burdens by State from Bush s $87-Billion-Every-51-Days Borrowing Binge

We re Paying Dearly for Bush s Tax Cuts Study Shows Burdens by State from Bush s $87-Billion-Every-51-Days Borrowing Binge Citizens for Tax Justice 202-626-3780 September 23, 2003 (9 pp.) Contact: Bob McIntyre We re Paying Dearly for Bush s Tax Cuts Study Shows Burdens by State from Bush s $87-Billion-Every-51-Days Borrowing

More information

TABLE OF CONTENTS. Introduction. Identifying the Importance of ID. Overview. Policy Recommendations. Conclusion. Summary of Findings

TABLE OF CONTENTS. Introduction. Identifying the Importance of ID. Overview. Policy Recommendations. Conclusion. Summary of Findings 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction Identifying the Importance of ID Overview Policy Recommendations Conclusion Summary of Findings Quick Reference Guide 3 3 4 6 7 8 8 The National Network for Youth gives

More information

Chapter 10: Introduction to Citation Form

Chapter 10: Introduction to Citation Form Chapter 10: Introduction to Citation Form Chapter 10: Introduction to Citation Form Chapter Outline: 10.1 Citation: A Legal Address 10.2 State Cases: Long Form 10.3 State Cases: Short Form 10.4 Federal

More information

ADVANCEMENT, JURISDICTION-BY-JURISDICTION

ADVANCEMENT, JURISDICTION-BY-JURISDICTION , JURISDICTION-B-JURISDICTION Jurisdictions that make advancement statutorily mandatory subject to opt-out or limitation. EXPRESSL MANDATOR 1 Minnesota 302A. 521, Subd. 3 North Dakota 10-19.1-91 4. Ohio

More information

Incorporation CHAPTER 2

Incorporation CHAPTER 2 mbcaa_02_c02_p001-110.qxd 11/26/07 11:52 AM Page 1 CHAPTER 2 Incorporation 2.01. Incorporators 2.02. Articles of incorporation 2.03. Incorporation 2.04. Liability for preincorporation transactions 2.05.

More information

ACCESS TO STATE GOVERNMENT 1. Web Pages for State Laws, State Rules and State Departments of Health

ACCESS TO STATE GOVERNMENT 1. Web Pages for State Laws, State Rules and State Departments of Health 1 ACCESS TO STATE GOVERNMENT 1 Web Pages for State Laws, State Rules and State Departments of Health LAWS ALABAMA http://www.legislature.state.al.us/codeofalabama/1975/coatoc.htm RULES ALABAMA http://www.alabamaadministrativecode.state.al.us/alabama.html

More information

MEMORANDUM JUDGES SERVING AS ARBITRATORS AND MEDIATORS

MEMORANDUM JUDGES SERVING AS ARBITRATORS AND MEDIATORS Knowledge Management Office MEMORANDUM Re: Ref. No.: By: Date: Regulation of Retired Judges Serving as Arbitrators and Mediators IS 98.0561 Jerry Nagle, Colleen Danos, and Anne Endress Skove October 22,

More information

State Trial Courts with Incidental Appellate Jurisdiction, 2010

State Trial Courts with Incidental Appellate Jurisdiction, 2010 ALABAMA: G X X X de novo District, Probate, s ALASKA: ARIZONA: ARKANSAS: de novo or on the de novo (if no ) G O X X de novo CALIFORNIA: COLORADO: District Court, Justice of the Peace,, County, District,

More information

Rhoads Online State Appointment Rules Handy Guide

Rhoads Online State Appointment Rules Handy Guide Rhoads Online Appointment Rules Handy Guide ALABAMA Yes (15) DOI date approved 27-7-30 ALASKA Appointments not filed with DOI. Record producer appointment in SIC register within 30 days of effective date.

More information

Effect of Nonpayment

Effect of Nonpayment Alabama Ala. Code 15-22-36.1 D may apply to the board of pardons and paroles for a Certificate of Eligibility to Register to Vote upon satisfaction of several requirements, including that D has paid victim

More information

Limitations on Contributions to Political Committees

Limitations on Contributions to Political Committees Limitations on Contributions to Committees Term for PAC Individual PAC Corporate/Union PAC Party PAC PAC PAC Transfers Alabama 10-2A-70.2 $500/election Alaska 15.13.070 Group $500/year Only 10% of a PAC's

More information

State Law Guide UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE BENEFITS FOR DOMESTIC & SEXUAL VIOLENCE SURVIVORS

State Law Guide UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE BENEFITS FOR DOMESTIC & SEXUAL VIOLENCE SURVIVORS State Law Guide UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE BENEFITS FOR DOMESTIC & SEXUAL VIOLENCE SURVIVORS Some victims of domestic violence, sexual assault, or stalking need to leave their jobs because of the violence

More information

FIFTY STATES AND D.C. SURVEY OF LAWS THAT AUTHORIZE OR RECOGNIZE PRIVATE CITIZEN-INITIATED INVESTIGATION AND/OR PROSECUTION OF CRIMINAL OFFENSES

FIFTY STATES AND D.C. SURVEY OF LAWS THAT AUTHORIZE OR RECOGNIZE PRIVATE CITIZEN-INITIATED INVESTIGATION AND/OR PROSECUTION OF CRIMINAL OFFENSES FIFTY STATES AND D.C. SURVEY OF LAWS THAT AUTHORIZE OR RECOGNIZE PRIVATE CITIZEN-INITIATED INVESTIGATION AND/OR PROSECUTION OF CRIMINAL OFFENSES The National Crime Victim Law Institute (NCVLI) makes no

More information

CONTRIBUTORY NEGLIGENCE/COMPARATIVE FAULT LAWS IN ALL 5O STATES

CONTRIBUTORY NEGLIGENCE/COMPARATIVE FAULT LAWS IN ALL 5O STATES CONTRIBUTORY NEGLIGENCE/COMPARATIVE FAULT LAWS IN ALL 5O STATES We have compiled a list of the various laws in every state dealing with whether the state is a pure contributory negligence state (bars recovery

More information

New Population Estimates Show Slight Changes For 2010 Congressional Apportionment, With A Number of States Sitting Close to the Edge

New Population Estimates Show Slight Changes For 2010 Congressional Apportionment, With A Number of States Sitting Close to the Edge 67 Emerywood Court Manassas, Virginia 202 202 789.2004 tel. or 703 580.7267 703 580.6258 fax Info@electiondataservices.com EMBARGOED UNTIL 6:0 P.M. EST, SUNDAY, SEPTEMBER 26, 200 Date: September 26, 200

More information

Background. Hon. Joseph L. Slights III, New Castle County Courthouse, Wilmington, DE

Background. Hon. Joseph L. Slights III, New Castle County Courthouse, Wilmington, DE JUDICIAL ETHICS CONSIDERATIONS WHEN MANAGING MULTI-JURISDICTION LITIGATION BY GREGORY E. MIZE, JUDICIAL FELLOW, NCSC & JAMES FLETCHER Background In 2011 CCJ adopted a resolution directing NCSC to take

More information

National State Law Survey: Statute of Limitations 1

National State Law Survey: Statute of Limitations 1 National State Law Survey: Limitations 1 Alabama Alaska Arizona Arkansas California Colorado Connecticut Delaware DC Florida Georgia Hawaii limitations Trafficking and CSEC within 3 limit for sex trafficking,

More information

STATE LAWS SUMMARY: CHILD LABOR CERTIFICATION REQUIREMENTS BY STATE

STATE LAWS SUMMARY: CHILD LABOR CERTIFICATION REQUIREMENTS BY STATE STATE LAWS SUMMARY: CHILD LABOR CERTIFICATION REQUIREMENTS BY STATE THE PROBLEM: Federal child labor laws limit the kinds of work for which kids under age 18 can be employed. But as with OSHA, federal

More information

The remaining legislative bodies have guides that help determine bill assignments. Table shows the criteria used to refer bills.

The remaining legislative bodies have guides that help determine bill assignments. Table shows the criteria used to refer bills. ills and ill Processing 3-17 Referral of ills The first major step in the legislative process is to introduce a bill; the second is to have it heard by a committee. ut how does legislation get from one

More information

Immigrant Caregivers:

Immigrant Caregivers: Immigrant Caregivers: The Implications of Immigration Status on Foster Care Licensure August 2017 INTRODUCTION All foster parents seeking to care for children in the custody of child welfare agencies must

More information

NDAA COMFORT ITEMS COMPILATION (Last updated July 2010)

NDAA COMFORT ITEMS COMPILATION (Last updated July 2010) NDAA COMFORT ITEMS COMPILATION (Last updated July 2010) This compilation contains legislation, session laws, and codified statues. All statutes, laws, and bills listed in this compilation have been signed

More information

Exhibit A. Anti-Advance Waiver Of Lien Rights Statutes in the 50 States and DC

Exhibit A. Anti-Advance Waiver Of Lien Rights Statutes in the 50 States and DC Exhibit A Anti-Advance Waiver Of Lien Rights Statutes in the 50 States and DC STATE ANTI- ADVANCE WAIVER OF LIEN? STATUTE(S) ALABAMA ALASKA Yes (a) Except as provided under (b) of this section, a written

More information

/mediation.htm s/adr.html rograms/adr/

/mediation.htm   s/adr.html   rograms/adr/ Alaska Alaska Court System AK http://www.state.ak.us/courts /mediation.htm A variety of programs are offered in courts throughout the state. Alabama Arkansas Alabama Center for AL http://www.alabamaadr.org

More information

Case 3:15-md CRB Document 4700 Filed 01/29/18 Page 1 of 5

Case 3:15-md CRB Document 4700 Filed 01/29/18 Page 1 of 5 Case 3:15-md-02672-CRB Document 4700 Filed 01/29/18 Page 1 of 5 Michele D. Ross Reed Smith LLP 1301 K Street NW Suite 1000 East Tower Washington, D.C. 20005 Telephone: 202 414-9297 Fax: 202 414-9299 Email:

More information

Controlled Substances: Scheduling Authorities, Acts, and Schedules

Controlled Substances: Scheduling Authorities, Acts, and Schedules Controlled Substances: Scheduling Authorities, Acts, and Schedules Research current through November 2, 2015. This project was supported by Grant No. G15599ONDCP03A, awarded by the Office of National Drug

More information

Table 1. Comparison of Creditor s Rights Provisions Of the Uniform LP Act and the Uniform LLC Act

Table 1. Comparison of Creditor s Rights Provisions Of the Uniform LP Act and the Uniform LLC Act Table 1 Comparison of Creditor s Rights Provisions Of the Uniform LP Act and the Uniform LLC Act Creditor s rights statute derived from 703 of the Revised Uniform Limited Partnership Act (1976) On application

More information

Appendix Y: States with Rules Identical to FRCP Draft. By: Tarja Cajudo and Leslye E. Orloff. February 8, 2018

Appendix Y: States with Rules Identical to FRCP Draft. By: Tarja Cajudo and Leslye E. Orloff. February 8, 2018 Appendix Y: States with Rules Identical to FRCP 4 1 - Draft By: Tarja Cajudo and Leslye E. Orloff February 8, 2018 Question: Which states have rules of civil procedure that use near the exact language

More information

Campaign Finance E-Filing Systems by State WHAT IS REQUIRED? WHO MUST E-FILE? Candidates (Annually, Monthly, Weekly, Daily).

Campaign Finance E-Filing Systems by State WHAT IS REQUIRED? WHO MUST E-FILE? Candidates (Annually, Monthly, Weekly, Daily). Exhibit E.1 Alabama Alabama Secretary of State Mandatory Candidates (Annually, Monthly, Weekly, Daily). PAC (annually), Debts. A filing threshold of $1,000 for all candidates for office, from statewide

More information

Restitution and Asset Forfeiture: A Focus on Human Trafficking Current as of April 2014

Restitution and Asset Forfeiture: A Focus on Human Trafficking Current as of April 2014 ÆQUITAS Restitution and Asset Forfeiture: A Focus on Human Trafficking Current as of April 2014 1100 H STREET NW, SUITE 310 WASHINGTON, DC 20005 P: (202) 558-0040 F: (202) 393-1918 WWW.AEQUITASRESOURCE.ORG

More information

50 State Desktop Reference

50 State Desktop Reference 50 State Desktop Reference What Businesses Need To Know About n-compete and Trade Secrets Law 2017 2018 EDITION Dear Clients and Friends, We are pleased to provide you with the 2017 2018 edition of our

More information

MEMORANDUM SUMMARY NATIONAL OVERVIEW. Research Methodology:

MEMORANDUM SUMMARY NATIONAL OVERVIEW. Research Methodology: MEMORANDUM Prepared for: Sen. Taylor Date: January 26, 2018 By: Whitney Perez Re: Strangulation offenses LPRO: LEGISLATIVE POLICY AND RESEARCH OFFICE You asked for information on offense levels for strangulation

More information

50 State DESKTOP REFERENCE. What Employers Need To Know About Non-Compete and Trade Secrets Law EDITION

50 State DESKTOP REFERENCE. What Employers Need To Know About Non-Compete and Trade Secrets Law EDITION 50 State DESKTOP REFERENCE What Employers Need To Know About n-compete and Trade Secrets Law 2016-2017 EDITION Dear Clients and Friends, We are pleased to provide you with the 2016 2017 edition of our

More information

ACTION: Notice announcing addresses for summons and complaints. SUMMARY: Our Office of the General Counsel (OGC) is responsible for processing

ACTION: Notice announcing addresses for summons and complaints. SUMMARY: Our Office of the General Counsel (OGC) is responsible for processing This document is scheduled to be published in the Federal Register on 02/23/2017 and available online at https://federalregister.gov/d/2017-03495, and on FDsys.gov 4191-02U SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION

More information

2008 Changes to the Constitution of International Union UNITED STEELWORKERS

2008 Changes to the Constitution of International Union UNITED STEELWORKERS 2008 Changes to the Constitution of International Union UNITED STEELWORKERS MANUAL ADOPTED AT LAS VEGAS, NEVADA July 2008 Affix to inside front cover of your 2005 Constitution CONSTITUTIONAL CHANGES Constitution

More information

State UCC Fraudulent Filing Statutes & Rules Compiled by Paul Hodnefield, Corporation Service Company August 3, 2015

State UCC Fraudulent Filing Statutes & Rules Compiled by Paul Hodnefield, Corporation Service Company August 3, 2015 State UCC Fraudulent Filing Statutes & Rules Compiled by Paul Hodnefield, Corporation Service Company August 3, 2015 The following list of fraudulent filing laws includes state statutes and administrative

More information

Planning for the Operation of Pass Through Entities

Planning for the Operation of Pass Through Entities College of William & Mary Law School William & Mary Law School Scholarship Repository William & Mary Annual Tax Conference Conferences, Events, and Lectures 1997 Planning for the Operation of Pass Through

More information

Speedy Trial Statutes in Cases Involving Child Victims and Witnesses Updated May 2011

Speedy Trial Statutes in Cases Involving Child Victims and Witnesses Updated May 2011 Speedy Trial Statutes in Cases Involving Child Victims and Witnesses Updated May 2011 This compilation contains legislation, session laws, and codified statues. All statutes, laws, and bills listed in

More information

Registered Agents. Question by: Kristyne Tanaka. Date: 27 October 2010

Registered Agents. Question by: Kristyne Tanaka. Date: 27 October 2010 Topic: Registered Agents Question by: Kristyne Tanaka Jurisdiction: Hawaii Date: 27 October 2010 Jurisdiction Question(s) Does your State allow registered agents to resign from a dissolved entity? For

More information

Class Actions and the Refund of Unconstitutional Taxes. Revenue Laws Study Committee Trina Griffin, Research Division April 2, 2008

Class Actions and the Refund of Unconstitutional Taxes. Revenue Laws Study Committee Trina Griffin, Research Division April 2, 2008 Class Actions and the Refund of Unconstitutional Taxes Revenue Laws Study Committee Trina Griffin, Research Division April 2, 2008 United States Supreme Court North Carolina Supreme Court Refunds of Unconstitutional

More information

Department of Legislative Services Maryland General Assembly 2010 Session

Department of Legislative Services Maryland General Assembly 2010 Session Department of Legislative Services Maryland General Assembly 2010 Session HB 52 FISCAL AND POLICY NOTE House Bill 52 Judiciary (Delegate Smigiel) Regulated Firearms - License Issued by Delaware, Pennsylvania,

More information

Nos , IN THE Supreme Court of the United States. DAIMLERCHRYSLER CORPORATION, ET AL., Petitioners, v.

Nos , IN THE Supreme Court of the United States. DAIMLERCHRYSLER CORPORATION, ET AL., Petitioners, v. Nos. 04-1704, 04-1724 IN THE Supreme Court of the United States OCTOBER TERM, 2005 DAIMLERCHRYSLER CORPORATION, ET AL., Petitioners, v. CHARLOTTE CUNO, ET AL., Respondents. On Writ of Certiorari to the

More information