Sen. Ray Seigfried

This Act updates and modernizes the Delaware Self-Service Storage Facilities Act. The Act clarifies that self-storage rental agreements may be delivered and accepted electronically. The bill borrows language from the Delaware Residential Landlord Tenant Act regarding the legal effect of unsigned rental agreements. The bill addresses vehicle storage at a self-service storage facility and clarifies the disposition of property following the termination or nonrenewal of the rental agreement by either the occupant or owner. Finally, the Act updates the requirements to allow advertisements be placed on websites that regularly advertise property for auction or sale, making Delaware law consistent with most jurisdictions, including Maryland and the District of Columbia.

This Act provides a pathway for former defendants in eviction actions to have the eviction filings against them shielded from public view. Being the subject of an eviction filing can prevent an individual from securing housing for years after any judgment in the case has been satisfied. Even tenants who prevailed in eviction actions may be denied housing by landlords who turn away any applicant with a prior eviction filing, regardless of the outcome of the case. The well-known health, social, and economic consequences of eviction can thus linger for years after an eviction filing, and trap individuals – including many children and families – in a cycle of poverty and housing instability. The effects are particularly acute among already marginalized groups, such as Black and female renters. By shielding eviction records when an individual has met certain requirements, this Act will help break down barriers to stable housing and economic security. Under this Act, the Court must grant shielding upon a motion by the defendant if the Court finds any of the following to be true: 1. The judgment against the defendant was a judgment on the merits, a default judgment, or a stipulated judgment, 5 or more years have passed since the judgment was entered, the defendant has satisfied any monetary award included in the judgment, and the defendant has had no other similar judgments within 5 years of the defendant’s motion to shield. 2. The parties resolved the action through a stipulated agreement, and the defendant has complied with the terms of the stipulated agreement. 3. The plaintiff withdrew the complaint. 4. The Court dismissed the plaintiff’s complaint. 5. The final judgment was in favor of the defendant. 6. The plaintiff and the defendant have agreed to the shielding. 7. The shielding of the records is clearly in the interests of justice. The Court may not charge a filing fee for a motion to shield. Once the Court has granted the shielding, the Court has 45 days to effectuate it. An individual whose eviction record has been shielded can answer questions about prior evictions as if the shielded action was never filed. This Act is a second Substitute for Senate Bill No. 115. Like Senate Substitute No. 1 for Senate Bill No. 115, Senate Substitute No. 2 for Senate Bill No. 115 does the following: 1. Adds judgement by stipulation to the list of judgments for which shielding is available after 5 years if the defendant has satisfied any monetary award included in the judgment. 2. Creates exceptions that make the shielded records available to the Department of Justice and the defendant in the action. 3. Allows for records of shielded actions to be available to the public for purposes of preserving case law, provided that all identifying information is redacted or otherwise obscured. 4. Makes minor technical changes. The primary differences between Senate Substitute No. 1 for Senate Bill No. 115 and Senate Substitute No. 2 for Senate Bill No. 115 are as follows: 1. Senate Substitute No. 2 replaces the term “expungement” with the term “shielding” to better reflect how the Court will be handling records. 2. Senate Substitute No. 2 eliminates the provision in Senate Substitute No. 1 that would have allowed certain eviction records to be automatically shielded. 3. Senate Substitute No. 2 adds a requirement that a defendant seeking shielding under paragraph (a)(1) of § 5720 (lines 6 through 9) have no other similar judgments against them within 5 years of the motion to shield. Senate Substitute No 2. also adds language specifying that redacted records are being made available for purposes of preserving important case law, and that the Court is responsible only for databases and systems that it controls.

This Act is a substitute for Senate Bill No. 156. Like Senate Bill No. 156, this Substitute prohibits the reporting of medical debt to consumer reporting agencies and prohibits any medical debt from being included on a consumer report. Since 2023, at least 9 other states have passed laws that prohibit or restrict the reporting of medical debt on credit reports, including California, New Jersy, and Virginia. This Act differs from Senate Bill No. 156 in that it (1) adds language to the purpose section of the statute making it clear that the intent of the chapter is for medical debt not to be used in credit, employment, or housing decisions; (2) removes the proposed definition of medical debt information and instead adds a definition of medical debt; and (3) removes the proposed prohibition language on using a credit report containing medical debt information from being used when making decisions regarding someone’s credit, employment, or housing.

This Act is intended to supplement protections under federal law for members of the military, their families, and veterans by adding “military status” as a protected class for purposes of the State’s public accommodations, housing, insurance, education, and employment laws. Technical corrections are also made to existing statutory language to conform with the requirements of the Legislative Drafting Manual. This House Substitute No. 1 adds language to clarify that distinctions or differential treatment based on military status that are allowed by State law or regulation, federal law or regulation, or government contract, are not unfair or discriminatory practices. It also updates existing statutory language that was changed by 84 Del. Laws c 429.

Excess skin and subcutaneous tissue can create a risk of rashes or infections, make walking and movement difficult, and make everyday chores difficult. An example of treatment that removes excess skin and subcutaneous tissue is a panniculectomy. A panniculectomy is an operative procedure that contours, or changes the shape and form, of the abdomen by removing significant excess skin and subcutaneous tissue. Removal of excess skin and subcutaneous tissue can improve a patient’s health and quality of life. This Act requires individual health insurance plans delivered under Chapter 33 of Title 18 and group and blanket health insurance plans delivered under Chapter 35 of Title 18 to cover medically necessary removal of excess skin and subcutaneous tissue, including panniculectomies. This Act also requires the State employee health insurance plan and State Medicaid plans to cover medically necessary removal of excess skin and subcutaneous tissue, including panniculectomies. Medically necessary means as defined in § 3371(8) for individual health insurance plans and as defined in § 3581(8) for group and blanket health insurance plans, State employee health insurance plans, and State Medicaid plans. This Act applies to all policies, contracts, or certicates issued, renewed, modified, alterered, amended, or resissued after December 31, 2026.

This Act requires the Department of Health and Social Services, in consultation with the Department of Education, to post existing materials on type 1 diabetes to their website. Each local education agency shall make the informational materials available to the parents or guardians of students enrolled in their schools.

Under Chapter 69 of Title 29 of the Delaware Code, the Section of Government Support Services in the Office of Management and Budget ("Section") is responsible for effectuating the State’s procurement process. This Act is a Substitute for Senate Bill No. 134. Like Senate Bill No. 134, this Act seeks to modernize the definition of reverse auctions. This Act differs from Senate Bill No. 134 by providing that the Section is permitted to use reverse auctions only in the procurement of professional services for or related to pharmaceuticals or pharmacy benefits management services.

Senate Bill 166, passed in 2022, created the Prescription Opioid Impact Fund as part of an overall structure that would both maximize the monies paid by settling Opioids defendants to Delaware and to create a structure whereby those settlement monies could be managed and distributed on a statewide basis through a stakeholder-informed process. The complete legislation is found at Title 16 of the Delaware Code, Chapter 48B, Sections 4801B through 4809B. Chapter 48B applied to settlements with entities, and did not apply to bankruptcies. This is because the bankruptcy process itself extinguishes claims and thus provides the necessary “global peace” for settling parties. At the time SB 166 was passed, it was contemplated that, in the context of the Purdue Pharma bankruptcy, the Sackler family members would obtain this type of bankruptcy-style discharge and release. However, in the summer of 2024, the United States Supreme Court ruled that such a discharge was impermissible. This decision thus required that the states negotiate a non-bankruptcy settlement with the Sacklers, which the Delaware Department has since been pursuing diligently. As announced on January 23, 2025, the Delaware Department of Justice has reached a proposed settlement-in-principle with Purdue Pharma and the Sackler family. In order to once again maximize the amount of Sackler money that Delaware will receive, it is now necessary to update the statutory bar created by the SB 166 to account for the fact that the Sackler family members are “individuals” not “entities." Consequently, the Delaware Department of Justice is recommending the amendments to Chapter 48B of Title 16 reflected in this Act.

The purpose of this Act is to protect medical providers in the State from out-of-state lawsuits and investigations that threaten the practice of medicine in the State. To that end this Act does the following: 1) Clarifies that physicians, physician assistants, and nurses that provide lawful healthcare services in the State do not engage in unprofessional conduct and cannot be disciplined for such services even if such services are illegal or considered to be unprofessional conduct or the unauthorized practice of medicine or nursing in another state. 2) In a civil action or proceeding, prohibits any healthcare provider from disclosing communications and records concerning healthcare services unless the patient authorizes such disclosure, with some exceptions. 3) Provides protections from civil and criminal actions that arise in another state that are based on the provision of health care services that are legal in Delaware. 4) Creates a cause of action for persons against whom a judgment was entered in another state based upon that person allegedly providing, receiving, or helping another person to provide healthcare services that are lawful in Delaware. (This does not apply to an action where no part of the acts that formed the basis for liability occurred in Delaware.) 5) Prohibits an insurer from taking an adverse action against a healthcare provider or organization for performing or providing healthcare services that are lawful in this State. 6) Prohibits any State or local agency, commission, board, or department from assisting a federal law-enforcement agency, another state’s law-enforcement agency, a private citizen, or a quasi-law-enforcement agency in relation to an investigation or inquiry concerning the lawfulness of healthcare services, if such services would be lawful as provided if they occurred entirely in the State.

This Act broadens the scope of a special fund administered by the Office of the Deaf and Hard of Hearing that provides telecommunications assistance to Delaware residents who have deafness, hearing loss, or speech disabilities related to deafness or hearing loss. This Act authorizes the office to provide residents with assistive devices that facilitate communication or provide users with information pertaining to emergencies. It also authorizes the Office to employ individuals to administer the program, provide education, and manage program resources. This Act adds restrictions on how money in the Fund may be spent and requires a three-month reserve be maintained to ensure financial solvency of the Fund. This Act also requires the Office of the Deaf and Hard of Hearing to file an annual report with the Governor, the Chief Clerk of the House, and the Secretary of the Senate concerning the performance of the fund in the previous fiscal year.