BILL ANALYSIS H.B. 2221 By: Schofield Judiciary & Civil Jurisprudence Committee Report (Unamended) BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE Interested parties suggest that the state's potential liability for attorney's fees in certain cases heard by a special three-judge district court is too high. H.B. 2221 seeks to impose a cap on the attorney's fees awarded in such a case. CRIMINAL JUSTICE IMPACT It is the committee's opinion that this bill does not expressly create a criminal offense, increase the punishment for an existing criminal offense or category of offenses, or change the eligibility of a person for community supervision, parole, or mandatory supervision. RULEMAKING AUTHORITY It is the committee's opinion that this bill does not expressly grant any additional rulemaking authority to a state officer, department, agency, or institution. ANALYSIS H.B. 2221 amends the Government Code to prohibit a special three-judge district court from awarding attorney's fees in an amount that exceeds $250,000 in a case assigned to the court due to the state, a state officer, or a state agency being a defendant in certain claims relating to the state's public school system or the apportionment of certain districts and in any related case consolidated with the case before the court. EFFECTIVE DATE On passage, or, if the bill does not receive the necessary vote, September 1, 2017.
BILL ANALYSIS
# BILL ANALYSIS
H.B. 2221
By: Schofield
Judiciary & Civil Jurisprudence
Committee Report (Unamended)
H.B. 2221
By: Schofield
Judiciary & Civil Jurisprudence
Committee Report (Unamended)
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE Interested parties suggest that the state's potential liability for attorney's fees in certain cases heard by a special three-judge district court is too high. H.B. 2221 seeks to impose a cap on the attorney's fees awarded in such a case.
CRIMINAL JUSTICE IMPACT It is the committee's opinion that this bill does not expressly create a criminal offense, increase the punishment for an existing criminal offense or category of offenses, or change the eligibility of a person for community supervision, parole, or mandatory supervision.
RULEMAKING AUTHORITY It is the committee's opinion that this bill does not expressly grant any additional rulemaking authority to a state officer, department, agency, or institution.
ANALYSIS H.B. 2221 amends the Government Code to prohibit a special three-judge district court from awarding attorney's fees in an amount that exceeds $250,000 in a case assigned to the court due to the state, a state officer, or a state agency being a defendant in certain claims relating to the state's public school system or the apportionment of certain districts and in any related case consolidated with the case before the court.
EFFECTIVE DATE On passage, or, if the bill does not receive the necessary vote, September 1, 2017.
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE
Interested parties suggest that the state's potential liability for attorney's fees in certain cases heard by a special three-judge district court is too high. H.B. 2221 seeks to impose a cap on the attorney's fees awarded in such a case.
CRIMINAL JUSTICE IMPACT
It is the committee's opinion that this bill does not expressly create a criminal offense, increase the punishment for an existing criminal offense or category of offenses, or change the eligibility of a person for community supervision, parole, or mandatory supervision.
RULEMAKING AUTHORITY
It is the committee's opinion that this bill does not expressly grant any additional rulemaking authority to a state officer, department, agency, or institution.
ANALYSIS
H.B. 2221 amends the Government Code to prohibit a special three-judge district court from awarding attorney's fees in an amount that exceeds $250,000 in a case assigned to the court due to the state, a state officer, or a state agency being a defendant in certain claims relating to the state's public school system or the apportionment of certain districts and in any related case consolidated with the case before the court.
EFFECTIVE DATE
On passage, or, if the bill does not receive the necessary vote, September 1, 2017.