The Senate Committee on Judiciary was called to order by Chairman Mark A. James, at 9:28 a.m., on Monday, March 22, 1999, in Room 2149 of the Legislative Building, Carson City, Nevada. Exhibit A is the Agenda. Exhibit B is the Attendance Roster. All exhibits are available and on file at the Research Library of the Legislative Counsel Bureau.

COMMITTEE MEMBERS PRESENT:

Senator Mark A. James, Chairman

Senator Jon C. Porter, Vice Chairman

Senator Mike McGinness

Senator Maurice Washington

Senator Dina Titus

Senator Valerie Wiener

Senator Terry Care

STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT:

Janice McClure, Committee Secretary

OTHERS PRESENT:

Chairman James opened the meeting by introducing four bill draft requests (BDRs).

Chairman James opened the hearing on Senate Bill (S.B.) 61.

John P. Fowler, Chairman, Business Law Section, State Bar of Nevada, submitted a memorandum (Exhibit C) reflecting amendments to S.B. 61 (First Reprint). He said the intent of the reprint was to combine S.B. 61, which was submitted for action by the Business Law Section, State Bar of Nevada, with S.B. 122, which was submitted by the Office of the Secretary of State.

Mr. Fowler furthered combining the bills would avoid conflict as both bills were of the same subject. Mr. Fowler continued the changes the Office of the Secretary State wished to have in S.B. 61 are described on page 12 of Exhibit C. He said that most of these sections deleted acknowledgment requirements and the bulk of S.B. 61 as amended deletes the requirement to get signatures acknowledged wherever the requirement appears in Title 7 of the Nevada Revised Statutes (NRS).

Chairman James asked if the deletion of the acknowledgment requirement would change anything where signatures are not required, and what the previously required acknowledgment of signatures provided that they will not provide for now.

Mr. Fowler replied the acknowledgments, which are currently required, give some small additional guidance that the person who purportedly signed the document did in fact sign the document. He said that is going to be taken care of by the electronic signature provisions that the Office of the Secretary of State will have both in statute and regulation. Mr. Fowler furthered the other main provision of S.B. 61 is to provide for allowing the Office of the Secretary of State, where necessary, to pass regulations on whether or not a name is distinguishable and on whether or not a corporation’s existence has lapsed to the extent that some other entity can pick up that corporation’s name. He continued that some of the other provisions of S.B. 61 cover certain bankruptcy filings the Office of the Secretary of State is required to accept. Mr. Fowler added Brad Wilkinson, Committee Counsel, Legal Division, Legislative Counsel Bureau, had discovered two glitches in this bill. First, there is a conflict notice with another bill and second, there is an actual conflict that deals with the provision in S.B. 61 amending NRS 113.070. Mr. Fowler said this is a statute the Business Law Section of the State Bar of Nevada wanted amended and it requires that any time a person sells a residence they have to give a copy of a memo to the buyer of the house describing the zoning district and zoning provisions of the house. In gaming districts the seller is also supposed to give the buyer a description of the nearest gaming enterprise district. Mr. Fowler said the statute was previously written in a way that made it look like a seller had to provide a buyer with two separate disclosure documents. The Business Law Section of the State Bar of Nevada wants to allow for the same information to be provided in one document instead of two documents.

Brad Wilkinson, Committee Counsel, Legal Division, Legislative Counsel Bureau, said the conflict notice was in conjunction with S.B. 19 which provides for the definition of street address of resident agents, so that definition would have to be added into the appropriate sections of S.B. 61 as well.

Scott W. Anderson, Deputy, Commercial Recordings Division, Office of the Secretary of State, submitted a letter addressed to the Senate Committee on Judiciary (Exhibit D) in support of the passage of S.B. 61 as amended in the reprint.

There being no further testimony, Chairman James closed the hearing on S.B. 61. Chairman James pointed out S.B. 122 was the bill incorporated into S.B. 61, which was just heard.

Chairman James announced S.B. 358 was taken off the agenda and would not be heard today; he then introduced S.B. 480.

Paula Berkley, Lobbyist, Nevada Network Against Domestic Violence, said she fully supported this protection bill for victims of domestic violence and thanked Chairman James for his continuing interest in domestic violence issues.

Chairman James said this bill is a follow-up to a bill he introduced last session and was passed, which was the creation of fictitious identities for victims of domestic violence.

There being no further testimony, Chairman James closed the hearing on S.B. 480 and asked for a motion to do pass S.B. 480.

Senator Wiener said the last time this section came up the jury pool was being extended from 65 to 70 years old, and a question had arisen about locomotive engineers and other job titles that no longer exist being exempted. Senator Wiener said she wanted to go on record requesting that the next time this statute comes up this issue can be addressed. Chairman James said that maybe it would be taken up next session.

Chairman James introduced a BDR from the Nevada Resort Association.

There being no further business, Chairman James adjourned the meeting at 9:50 a.m.

RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED:

Janice McClure,

Committee Secretary

APPROVED BY:

Senator Mark A. James, Chairman

DATE: