The House passed House Bill 151 unanimously last week. The bill 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 Senate Judiciary Committee.
|HOUSE BILL 151 – ADDING ECONOMIC INTERFERENCE TO ABUSE DEFINITIONS IN PFA PROCEEDINGS||Currrent Status – House Passed 40-0-1. Senate Judiciary 6/22/23|
|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 – Baumbach Bolden Bush Carson Chukwuocha Cooke Dorsey-Walker Griffith Harris Johnson Lambert Longhurst Lynn Matthews Minor-Brown Moore Morrison Neal Osienski Parker-Selby Phillips Romer Schwartzkopf Williams Wilson-Anton // Briggs King Collins Dukes Gray Hensley Hilovsky Morris Postles Ramone Short Shupe Smith Spiegelman Vanderwende Yearick||Senate Yes Votes –|
|House No Votes – None||Senate No Votes –|
|House Absents or Not Voting – Heffernan||Senate Absent or Not Voting –|