BILL ANALYSIS |
C.S.H.B. 1038 |
By: Rinaldi |
Judiciary & Civil Jurisprudence |
Committee Report (Substituted) |
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE
Interested parties assert that the current process by which a party may file a motion to dismiss a baseless cause of action is not serving its intended purpose of reducing frivolous lawsuits as parties are reluctant to avail themselves of the process because costs and attorney's fees are awarded to the prevailing party regardless of other considerations. C.S.H.B. 1038 seeks to increase the viability of the motion to dismiss as a defense against frivolous lawsuits by authorizing such an award rather than requiring it.
|
||||||||||
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
C.S.H.B. 1038 amends the Civil Practice and Remedies Code to replace a requirement that a trial court award costs and reasonable and necessary attorney's fees to the prevailing party in a civil proceeding on the court's granting or denial, in whole or in part, of a motion to dismiss certain causes of action that have no basis in law or fact with an authorization for a court to do so.
|
||||||||||
EFFECTIVE DATE
September 1, 2017.
|
||||||||||
COMPARISON OF ORIGINAL AND SUBSTITUTE
While C.S.H.B. 1038 may differ from the original in minor or nonsubstantive ways, the following comparison is organized and formatted in a manner that indicates the substantial differences between the introduced and committee substitute versions of the bill.
|
||||||||||
|