Estates and trusts: undue influence.
Summary
Existing law establishes an express presumption of fraud or undue influence when a donative instrument makes a gift to the person who drafted or transcribed the instrument or to the care custodian of a transferor who is a dependent adult, as specified. Existing law exempts, among others, spouses and cohabitants of the transferor, from the presumption of fraud or undue influence. This bill would additionally subject to the above-described presumption a gift made to a care custodian who commenced a marriage, cohabitation, or domestic partnership with a transferor who is a dependent adult while providing services to that dependent adult, or within 90 days after those services were last provided to the dependent adult, if the donative transfer occurred, or the instrument was executed, less than 6 months after the marriage, cohabitation, or domestic partnership commenced. Existing law provides that if a decedent fails to provide by testamentary instrument for the decedent's surviving spouse who married the decedent after the execution of all the decedent's testamentary instruments, the omitted spouse is required to receive 12 of the decedent's community and quasi-community property and a share of the separate property, as specified. However, existing law prohibits a surviving spouse from receiving a share of the decedent's estate consistent with these provisions in certain circumstances, including, among others, when the spouse made a valid agreement waiving the right to share in the decedent's estate. This bill would further prohibit a surviving spouse from receiving a share of the decedent's estate as described above if the spouse was a care custodian of the decedent who was a dependent adult and the marriage commenced while the care custodian provided services to the decedent, or within 90 days after those services were last provided to the decedent, and the decedent died less than 6 months after the marriage commenced, unless the spouse can prove by clear and convincing evidence that the marriage was not the product of fraud or undue influence.
Bill status
signed
all 5 stages cleared
Introduction
Jan 2019
Committee Review
Jun 2019
Assembly Passage
Mar 2019
Senate Passage
Jun 2019
Signed into Law
Jun 2019
Introduced Jan 31, 2019
Signed Jun 26, 2019
Floor votes · Senate Jun 17, 2019 · Assembly Mar 18, 2019
How they voted
34–0
Passed
Total votes 34
Jun 17, 2019
D
Democratic26
100% Yea
R
Republican8
100% Yea
Vote distribution
All Yea
All Nay
Mixed
No data
Full legislative history
Actions timeline
Total actions
15
Key actions
7
Committee
6
Jun 26, 2019
Signed into law
Approved by the Governor.
legislature
Jun 18, 2019
Lower · Passed
In Assembly. Ordered to Engrossing and Enrolling.
lower
Jun 17, 2019
Upper · Passed
Read third time. Passed. Ordered to the Assembly. (Ayes 40. Noes 0. Page 1606.).
upper
Jun 4, 2019
Upper · Passed
From committee: Do pass. To Consent Calendar. (Ayes 9. Noes 0.) (June 4).
upper
Apr 24, 2019
Committee
Referred to Com. on JUD.
upper
Mar 18, 2019
Lower · Passed
Read third time. Passed. Ordered to the Senate. (Ayes 76. Noes 0. Page 708.)
lower
Mar 12, 2019
Lower · Passed
From committee: Do pass. To Consent Calendar. (Ayes 11. Noes 0.) (March 12).
lower
Feb 11, 2019
Committee
Referred to Com. on JUD.
lower
Feb 1, 2019
Lower · Passed
From printer. May be heard in committee March 3.
lower
1 primary · 0 co-sponsors
Sponsors
Role
Legislator
Party
State
District
P
BM
Brian Maienschein
DDemocratic
Ask Maddy
·
AI policy assistant
Ask Maddy about AB 328
Scope: CA
Hi! I can help you understand AB 328. 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