This measure would request that Congress adopt a national freight policy as a component of the next federal transportation bill and subsequently direct the United States Department of Transportation to implement its provisions.
Under existing law, a social host who furnishes alcoholic beverages to any person may not be held legally accountable for damages suffered by that person, or for injury to the person or property of, or death of, any 3rd person, resulting from the consumption of those beverages. This bill would provide that these provisions do not preclude a claim against a parent, guardian, or another adult who knowingly furnishes alcoholic beverages at his or her residence to a person under 21 years of age and that furnishing the alcoholic beverages may be found to be the proximate cause of resulting injuries or death, as provided.
This measure would designate the Beach Boulevard Interchange on State Highway Route 22 in the County of Orange as the Nguyen Ngoc Phu Human Rights Memorial Interchange. The measure would request the Department of Transportation to determine the cost of appropriate signs showing this designation and, upon receiving donations from nonstate sources covering that cost, to erect those signs.
Existing law designates specified days as having special significance, and specifies how the days of special significance should be observed in public elementary and secondary schools and educational institutions. This bill would repeal and recast these provisions. This bill would express findings and declarations of the Legislature relating to Ronald Reagan. This bill would designate February 6 of each year as Ronald Reagan Day, and would encourage public schools and educational institutions to engage in exercises remembering the life of Ronald Reagan, as specified. Existing law requires the Governor to proclaim various days in honor of a person, status, or an event. This bill would require the Governor to annually proclaim February 6 as Ronald Reagan Day.
Existing law, known as the "hearsay rule," provides that, at a hearing, evidence of a statement that was made other than by a witness while testifying at the hearing and that is offered to prove the truth of the matter stated is inadmissible. Existing law also provides exceptions to the hearsay rule to permit the admission of specified kinds of evidence, including evidence of a statement made by a declarant who is unavailable as a witness that he or she has or has not made a will, or has or has not revoked his or her will, or that identifies his or her will. This bill would expand that exception to the hearsay rule to permit the admission of evidence of a statement made by a declarant who is unavailable as a witness that he or she has or has not established or amended a revocable trust, or has or has not revoked his or her revocable trust or an amendment to a revocable trust, or that identifies his or her revocable trust or an amendment to a revocable trust.
The Power of Attorney Law creates various duties and requires an attorney-in-fact to observe the standard of care that would be observed by a prudent person dealing with property of another, or if an attorney-in-fact has special skills he or she shall observe the standard of care that would be observed by others with similar skills. However, existing law provides that an attorney-in-fact is not liable for a loss to the principal's property if he or she is not compensated, unless the loss results from his or her bad faith, intentional wrongdoing, or gross negligence. This bill would delete the latter provision. The bill would provide that if the attorney-in-fact breaches a duty pursuant to the Power of Attorney Law he or she is chargeable with interest for any loss or depreciation in value of the property, any profit made through the breach, or any profit that would have accrued to the principal if the loss or profit is a result of the breach. This bill would allow the court, in its discretion, to excuse the attorney-in-fact if he or she acted reasonably and in good faith, or if the court finds that an attorney-in-fact acted in bad faith, he or she would be held liable for twice the value of the property recovered.
This measure would designate Friday, May 7, 2010, as California Peace Officers' Memorial Day and would urge all Californians to use that day to honor California peace officers.
Existing law provides that any person who has been convicted of a violent felony who purchases, owns, or possesses body armor, as defined in the California Code of Regulations, except as authorized, is guilty of a felony, punishable by imprisonment in a state prison for 16 months or 2 or 3 years. However, the court, in People v. Saleem (102 Cal.Rptr.3d 652) , held that this provision is unconstitutionally vague in violation of due process. This bill would change the definition of "body armor" for purposes of this provision to mean any bullet-resistant material intended to provide ballistic and trauma protection for the person wearing the body armor. By expanding the scope of an existing crime, this bill would create 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. This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.
Existing law, with certain exceptions, establishes 8 hours as a day's work and a 40-hour workweek, and requires payment of prescribed overtime compensation for additional hours worked. Existing law authorizes the adoption by 23 of employees in a work unit of alternative workweek schedules providing for workdays no longer than 10 hours within a 40-hour workweek. This bill would permit an individual nonexempt employee to request an employee-selected flexible work schedule providing for workdays up to 10 hours per day within a 40-hour workweek, and would allow an employer to implement this schedule without any obligation to pay overtime compensation. The bill would require the Division of Labor Standards Enforcement in the Department of Industrial Relations to enforce this provision and adopt regulations.
