Protective orders: transfer of wireless telephone numbers.
Summary
Existing law authorizes a court to issue an ex parte protective order enjoining a party from engaging in specified acts against another party, including, among other things, threatening or harassing that party, and, in the discretion of the court, against other named family or household members. Existing law also authorizes a court to issue these protective orders and other orders relating to domestic violence prevention after a notice and hearing, including, among others, requiring a restrained party to participate in a batterer's program. Existing law authorizes a court to issue an ex parte order determining the temporary use, possession, and control of real or personal property of the parties and the payment of any liens or encumbrances coming due during the period the order is in effect. A violation of these court orders constitutes contempt of court, which is punishable as a misdemeanor. This bill would additionally authorize a court to issue an order requiring a wireless telephone service provider to transfer the billing authority and rights to a wireless telephone number or numbers to a petitioner. The bill would require that order to be a separate order directed to the wireless telephone service provider that lists the name and billing telephone number of the accountholder, the name of the person to whom the number or numbers will be transferred, and each number transferred to that person. The bill would prohibit a cause of action against a wireless telephone service provider, its officers, employees, or agents, for actions taken related to the transfer of billing authority and rights to a wireless telephone number or numbers in accordance with the terms of the court order. Because a violation of this court order would be punishable as a contempt, a misdemeanor, the bill would create a new crime and, therefore, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.
Bill status
failed
1 of 4 stages cleared
Introduction
Feb 2014
Committee Review
Floor Vote
Governor
Introduced Feb 20, 2014
Last action Nov 30, 2014
Floor votes
How they voted
No floor votes recorded yet.
Full legislative history
Actions timeline
Total actions
7
Key actions
1
Committee
3
Apr 1, 2014
Committee
Re-referred to Com. on RLS.
upper
Mar 25, 2014
Upper · Passed
From committee with author's amendments. Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on JUD.
upper
Mar 6, 2014
Committee
Referred to Com. on JUD.
upper
1 primary · 0 co-sponsors
Sponsors
Role
Legislator
Party
State
District
P
Leland Yee
DDemocratic
Ask Maddy
·
AI policy assistant
Ask Maddy about SB 1158
Scope: CA
Hi! I can help you understand SB 1158. What would you like to know?
Try one of these
i
Maddy answers using official bill text and legislative records. Always verify before sharing.
Sources cited inline