Stalking: remedies.
Summary
Existing law provides that a person is liable for the tort of stalking if he or she engaged in a pattern of conduct intended to follow, alarm, or harass the plaintiff, that resulted in the plaintiff reasonably fearing for his or her safety, or the safety of an immediate family member, and the defendant has either made a credible threat with the intent to place the plaintiff in reasonable fear for his or her safety, or that of an immediate family member or has violated a restraining order, as specified. This bill would include a pattern of conduct intended to place the plaintiff under surveillance within those elements defining the tort of stalking. The bill would permit the plaintiff to show, as an alternative to the plaintiff reasonably fearing for his or her safety or that of a family member, that the pattern of conduct resulted in the plaintiff suffering substantial emotional distress, and that the pattern of conduct would cause a reasonable person to suffer substantial emotional distress. The bill would require the plaintiff to show that the person has either made a credible threat with the intent to place the plaintiff in reasonable fear for his or her safety, or that of an immediate family member, or, reckless disregard for the safety of the plaintiff or that of an immediate family member. The bill would relieve the plaintiff, under exigent circumstances, as specified, of the requirement to demand that the defendant cease his or her behavior. The bill would also define the terms "follows," "place under surveillance," and "substantial emotional distress" for purposes of these provisions.
Bill status
signed
all 5 stages cleared
Introduction
Feb 2013
Committee Review
Aug 2014
Assembly Passage
Jan 2014
Senate Passage
Aug 2014
Signed into Law
Sep 2014
Introduced Feb 22, 2013
Signed Sep 30, 2014
Floor votes · Senate Aug 25, 2014 · Assembly Jan 29, 2014
How they voted
20–8
Passed · 7 other
Total votes 35
Aug 25, 2014
D
Democratic25
76% Yea
R
Republican10
80% Nay
Vote distribution
All Yea
All Nay
Mixed
No data
Full legislative history
Actions timeline
Total actions
25
Key actions
8
Committee
9
Amendments
3
Sep 30, 2014
Signed into law
Approved by the Governor.
legislature
Aug 27, 2014
Lower · Passed
Senate amendments concurred in. To Engrossing and Enrolling. (Ayes 56. Noes 19. Page 6514.).
lower
Aug 25, 2014
Senate · Passed
Senate Vote: pass (20-8-7)
senate
Aug 25, 2014
Introduced
In Assembly. Concurrence in Senate amendments pending. May be considered on or after August 27 pursuant to Assembly Rule 77.
lower
Jun 23, 2014
Upper · Passed
From committee: Do pass as amended. (Ayes 5. Noes 1.) (June 17).
upper
Feb 6, 2014
Committee
Referred to Com. on JUD.
upper
Jan 29, 2014
Assembly · Passed
Assembly Vote: pass (42-16-8)
assembly
Jan 16, 2014
Lower · Passed
From committee: Do pass as amended. (Ayes 8. Noes 1.) (January 14).
lower
Jan 7, 2014
Committee
Re-referred to Com. on JUD.
lower
Jan 6, 2014
Introduced
From committee chair, with author's amendments: Amend, and re-refer to Com. on JUD. Read second time and amended.
lower
May 7, 2013
Lower · Passed
In committee: Hearing postponed by committee.
lower
Apr 1, 2013
Committee
Re-referred to Com. on JUD.
lower
Mar 21, 2013
Introduced
From committee chair, with author's amendments: Amend, and re-refer to Com. on JUD. Read second time and amended.
lower
Mar 21, 2013
Committee
Referred to Com. on JUD.
lower
Feb 24, 2013
Lower · Passed
From printer. May be heard in committee March 26.
lower
Feb 22, 2013
Introduced
Introduced. To print.
lower
1 primary · 0 co-sponsors
Sponsors
Role
Legislator
Party
State
District
P
Richard Bloom
DDemocratic
Ask Maddy
·
AI policy assistant
Ask Maddy about AB 1356
Scope: CA
Hi! I can help you understand AB 1356. 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