House Bill 151 will add the intentional restriction of another adult’s access to economic resources that results in that adult’s loss of financial autonomy to the definitions of abuse for the purposes of a protection from abuse (PFA)proceeding.
So, in layman’s terms, if a person restricts access to your bank or credit accounts, then that qualifies as a form of abuse that you can seek a court order to protect you from.
This Act also specifies that tangible property of the petitioner includes legal documents belonging to the petitioner. In addition, this Act codifies the existing practice of Family Court to allow relief by ordering respondents to return specific legal documents.
The bill awaits a hearing in the House Judiciary Committee.
| HOUSE BILL 151 – ADDING ECONOMIC INTERFERENCE TO ABUSE DEFINITIONS IN PFA PROCEEDINGS | Currrent Status – House Judiciary 5/11/23 |
| House Sponsors – Morrison, Griffith, Heffernan, Williams, Baumbach, Lambert, Neal, Phillips, Romer, Wilson-Anton // Briggs King | Senate Sponsors – Gay, Hansen, Hoffner, Huxtable, Lockman, McBride, Pinkney, Sokola, Sturgeon, Townsen // Buckson |
| House Yes Votes – | Senate Yes Votes – |
| House No Votes – | Senate No Votes – |
| House Absents or Not Voting – | Senate Absent or Not Voting – |
0 comments on “HB 151 – Adding Economic Interference to Abuse Definitions in PFA Proceedings”