Texas 2011 82nd Regular

Texas Senate Bill SB1216 Engrossed / Fiscal Note

Filed 02/01/2025

Download
.pdf .doc .html
                    LEGISLATIVE BUDGET BOARD    Austin, Texas      FISCAL NOTE, 82ND LEGISLATIVE REGULAR SESSION            May 5, 2011      TO: Honorable Jim Jackson, Chair, House Committee on Judiciary & Civil Jurisprudence      FROM: John S O'Brien, Director, Legislative Budget Board     IN RE:SB1216 by Estes (Relating to determination of the validity and enforceability of a contract containing an arbitration agreement in suits for dissolution of marriage and certain suits affecting the parent-child relationship.), As Engrossed    No significant fiscal implication to the State is anticipated.  The bill would amend the Family Code to require a court to promptly try a case relating to a contract containing an arbitration agreement for the dissolution of a marriage or the parent-child relationship, and may order arbitration only if the court determines the contract is valid and enforceable against the party seeking to avoid arbitration. A determination that a contract is valid and enforceable would not affect the courts authority to stay arbitration or refuse to compel arbitration. The bill would include certain exceptions to the sections. The Office of Court Administration (OCA) reported that because the bill would not affect a courts right to stay or refuse to compel arbitration there should not be an increase in court filings; therefore, no significant fiscal impact on the courts is anticipated. Local Government Impact No significant fiscal implication to units of local government is anticipated.    Source Agencies:   LBB Staff:  JOB, JT, TP, KJG, JB    

LEGISLATIVE BUDGET BOARD
Austin, Texas
FISCAL NOTE, 82ND LEGISLATIVE REGULAR SESSION
May 5, 2011





  TO: Honorable Jim Jackson, Chair, House Committee on Judiciary & Civil Jurisprudence      FROM: John S O'Brien, Director, Legislative Budget Board     IN RE:SB1216 by Estes (Relating to determination of the validity and enforceability of a contract containing an arbitration agreement in suits for dissolution of marriage and certain suits affecting the parent-child relationship.), As Engrossed  

TO: Honorable Jim Jackson, Chair, House Committee on Judiciary & Civil Jurisprudence
FROM: John S O'Brien, Director, Legislative Budget Board
IN RE: SB1216 by Estes (Relating to determination of the validity and enforceability of a contract containing an arbitration agreement in suits for dissolution of marriage and certain suits affecting the parent-child relationship.), As Engrossed

 Honorable Jim Jackson, Chair, House Committee on Judiciary & Civil Jurisprudence 

 Honorable Jim Jackson, Chair, House Committee on Judiciary & Civil Jurisprudence 

 John S O'Brien, Director, Legislative Budget Board

 John S O'Brien, Director, Legislative Budget Board

SB1216 by Estes (Relating to determination of the validity and enforceability of a contract containing an arbitration agreement in suits for dissolution of marriage and certain suits affecting the parent-child relationship.), As Engrossed

SB1216 by Estes (Relating to determination of the validity and enforceability of a contract containing an arbitration agreement in suits for dissolution of marriage and certain suits affecting the parent-child relationship.), As Engrossed



No significant fiscal implication to the State is anticipated.

No significant fiscal implication to the State is anticipated.



The bill would amend the Family Code to require a court to promptly try a case relating to a contract containing an arbitration agreement for the dissolution of a marriage or the parent-child relationship, and may order arbitration only if the court determines the contract is valid and enforceable against the party seeking to avoid arbitration. A determination that a contract is valid and enforceable would not affect the courts authority to stay arbitration or refuse to compel arbitration. The bill would include certain exceptions to the sections. The Office of Court Administration (OCA) reported that because the bill would not affect a courts right to stay or refuse to compel arbitration there should not be an increase in court filings; therefore, no significant fiscal impact on the courts is anticipated.

Local Government Impact

No significant fiscal implication to units of local government is anticipated.

Source Agencies:



LBB Staff: JOB, JT, TP, KJG, JB

 JOB, JT, TP, KJG, JB