California 2019-2020 Regular Session

California Assembly Bill AB3364

Introduced
3/5/20  
Refer
4/24/20  
Report Pass
5/4/20  
Report Pass
5/4/20  
Refer
5/5/20  
Refer
5/5/20  
Report Pass
5/12/20  
Report Pass
5/12/20  
Refer
5/12/20  
Refer
5/12/20  
Report Pass
6/2/20  
Report Pass
6/2/20  
Engrossed
6/8/20  
Engrossed
6/8/20  
Refer
6/9/20  
Refer
6/9/20  
Refer
6/23/20  
Refer
6/23/20  
Report Pass
7/9/20  
Report Pass
7/9/20  
Refer
7/9/20  
Refer
7/9/20  
Report Pass
8/3/20  
Report Pass
8/3/20  
Refer
8/3/20  
Report Pass
8/13/20  
Report Pass
8/13/20  
Refer
8/13/20  
Refer
8/13/20  
Refer
8/19/20  
Report Pass
8/20/20  
Enrolled
8/31/20  
Chaptered
8/31/20  
Passed
8/31/20  

Caption

Judiciary omnibus.

Impact

The bill is expected to have broad implications on state laws, particularly in areas related to judicial processes and real estate transactions. By mandating that housing tenants receive notice and establishing new rules around rental agreements post-sale, the legislation seeks to enhance tenant protections. Furthermore, updates regarding debt collection practices are aimed at ensuring that identity theft claims are processed more efficiently, thereby reinforcing consumer rights. The bill also mandates that important notices regarding property sales be made available in multiple languages, thus improving accessibility.

Summary

Assembly Bill 3364, referred to as the Judiciary Omnibus, aims to make various amendments to numerous codes concerning legal procedures, tenant protections, and judicial responsibilities in California. One of the significant provisions includes a requirement for the State Bar to provide training on implicit bias within mandatory continuing legal education for attorneys, effective from January 1, 2022. Additionally, it modifies the procedures that landlords must follow when a notice of sale is posted, ensuring that tenants are informed of their rights, especially if the properties are being sold while occupied.

Sentiment

Overall, the sentiment surrounding AB 3364 appears to be largely positive among legislators, particularly those advocating for tenant rights and fairness in legal education. Supporters praise the emphasis on implicit bias training and tenant protections as vital steps toward improving justice and equity in California's legal system. However, there are concerns among some stakeholders regarding the potential costs to local governments associated with the implementation of new tenant protections and requirements for education providers.

Contention

While the bill has garnered support for its progressive measures, there are notable points of contention as well. Some critics worry that the bill's impact on landlord-tenant relationships may lead to unintended consequences in the housing market, such as increased rental costs or decreased availability of rental units. Additionally, the refinement of the powers of the Judicial Council and the broader implications of changes to debt collection practices may raise questions regarding enforcement and accountability, particularly among smaller entities who may be affected by added compliance requirements.

Companion Bills

No companion bills found.

Similar Bills

CA AB2960

Judiciary omnibus.

CA SB987

Pretrial release: pretrial assessment agencies.

CA SB809

California Fair Employment and Housing Act: Fair Chance Act: conviction history.

MN HF2300

Judiciary finance bill.

CA AB2354

Pretrial release: pretrial assessment agencies.

CA SB403

Discrimination on the basis of ancestry.

CA AB1556

Employment discrimination: unlawful employment practices.

CA AB3281

Judiciary omnibus.