California 2017-2018 Regular Session

California Assembly Bill AB1773

Introduced
1/4/18  
Refer
1/22/18  
Refer
1/22/18  
Report Pass
5/21/18  
Report Pass
5/21/18  
Refer
5/22/18  
Refer
5/22/18  
Report Pass
5/23/18  
Report Pass
5/23/18  
Engrossed
5/25/18  
Engrossed
5/25/18  
Refer
5/25/18  
Refer
5/25/18  
Refer
6/7/18  
Refer
6/7/18  
Report Pass
6/25/18  
Enrolled
7/3/18  
Enrolled
7/3/18  
Chaptered
7/9/18  
Chaptered
7/9/18  
Passed
7/9/18  

Caption

Claims against the state.

Impact

The passage of AB 1773 underscores the California legislative framework's approach to managing claims against the state, reinforcing the requirement for the Attorney General to secure and dispense funds in compliance with judicial rulings. The appropriation from the General Fund demonstrates the state's commitment to uphold legal and financial obligations stemming from lawsuits, potentially affecting the state's budget allocations for other programs and efforts.

Summary

Assembly Bill No. 1773, approved by the governor on July 9, 2018, addresses the immediate need to appropriate $11,095,000 from the California General Fund for the payment of various judgments against the state. The bill recognizes several specific legal settlements, including $140,000 for the case Cervantez v. Becerra, $10 million for Amado Onate v. James L. Pulley, and $955,000 for Robert M. Mallano v. John Chiang. The urgency of this bill necessitates immediate action to ensure claimants receive their entitled compensation without delay.

Sentiment

The sentiment surrounding AB 1773 appears to be largely practical; it is seen as a necessary legislative action to fulfil financial obligations promptly. There is a recognition among legislators that ignoring such settlements could worsen public trust in state governance and legal processes. The bipartisan recognition of the need for urgency demonstrates a consensus that addressing claims against the state is crucial for maintaining governmental integrity.

Contention

While AB 1773 was passed with significant support—passing the Assembly with a 37-0 vote—it may still face scrutiny in terms of budgetary impacts and accountability questions about how these settlements are reached. Critics might voice concerns about the larger implications of frequent settlement claims and the manner in which such legal situations arise, reflecting wider issues in state governance and legal liabilities.

Companion Bills

No companion bills found.

Similar Bills

CA SB1481

Claims against the state: appropriation.

CA SB939

Claims against the state: appropriation.

CA SB383

Claims against the state: appropriation.

CA AB213

Claims against the state.

CA SB418

Claims against the state: appropriation.

CA SB251

Claims against the state: appropriation.