BILL ANALYSIS Civil Practices Committee By: Pitts 02-20-95 4-20-95 BACKGROUND Technology has surpassed statutes in dealing with the handling of banking instruments. PURPOSE To allow digitized copies of checks to be admissible as evidence in judicial or administrative proceedings. RULEMAKING AUTHORITY It is the committee's opinion that this bill does not grant any additional rulemaking authority to a state officer, institution, or agency. SECTION BY SECTION ANALYSIS SECTION 1. Amends, Subchapter D, Chapter 35, Business and Commerce Code, as follows: Sect. 35.48(a)(1) adds (H) "digitized optical image" to the list of items of what constitutes business records. Renumbers subparagraph where appropriate. Sect. 35.48(a)(2) adds (E) "digitized optical image" to the list of items of reproduced items that may serve as a counterpart of an original business record. Renumbers subparagraph where appropriate. SECTION 2. Emergency Clause - Effective Immediately. COMPARISON OF ORIGINAL TO SUBSTITUTE The substitute deletes proposed Sect. 35.49, Business and Commerce Code, from the original. This would delete any reference of using electronically digitized copies as evidence in a judicial or administrative proceeding. The substitute adds the term "digitized optical image" to the list of business records that serve as a reproduced counterpart of an original business record. SUMMARY OF COMMITTEE ACTION H.B. 995 was considered in public hearing on February 22, 1995. The following individuals testified in support of H.B. 995: Gregg A. Bennett, representing State Bank and Trust Company; Karen Neeley, representing the Independent Bankers Association of Texas; Marvin E. Singleton, III, representing himself. No one testified in opposition to or neutrally on the bill. The bill was left pending. On March 1, 1995, the chair named the following subcommittee members: Representatives Will Hartnett (Chair), Paul Hilbert and Zeb Zbranek. The subcommittee considered a complete substitute for the bill. The substitute was adopted without objection. The bill was reported favorably as substituted, to the full committee by a record vote of two ayes, one nay, zero pnv, zero absent. After being recalled from subcommittee, the bill was considered by the committee in a public hearing on April 12, 1995. The committee considered a complete substitute for the bill. The substitute was adopted without objection. The bill was reported favorably as substituted with the recommendation that it do pass and be printed, by a record vote of six ayes, zero nays, zero pnvs with three absents.