Legislature(1995 - 1996)
1995-04-26 House Journal
Full Journal pdf1995-04-26 House Journal Page 1529 HB 158 The following, which had been held in second reading until today's calendar (page 1514), was again before the House: CS FOR HOUSE BILL NO. 158(FIN) am "An Act relating to civil actions; amending Alaska Rules of Civil Procedure 49, 68, and 95; amending Alaska Rule of Evidence 702; and providing for an effective date." Representative Porter placed a call of the House. Amendment No. 45 was offered by Representative Brown: Page 7, lines 10 - 11: Delete ", or that with reasonable probability will be received in the future by the claimant," Representative Brown moved and asked unanimous consent that Amendment No. 45 be adopted. Representative Porter objected. **The presence of Representative Masek was noted. Representative Porter lifted the call. 1995-04-26 House Journal Page 1530 HB 158 The question being: "Shall Amendment No. 45 be adopted?" The roll was taken with the following result: CSHB 158(FIN) am Second Reading Amendment No. 45 YEAS: 16 NAYS: 22 EXCUSED: 1 ABSENT: 1 Yeas: Austerman, Brice, Brown, Davies, B.Davis, Elton, Finkelstein, Foster, Grussendorf, Kubina, Mackie, Navarre, Nicholia, Robinson, Williams, Willis Nays: Bunde, G.Davis, Green, Hanley, Ivan, James, Kelly, Kohring, Kott, Martin, Masek, Moses, Mulder, Ogan, Parnell, Phillips, Porter, Rokeberg, Sanders, Therriault, Toohey, Vezey Excused: Barnes Absent: MacLean And so, Amendment No. 45 was not adopted. Amendment Nos. 46, 47 and 48 were not offered. Amendment No. 49 was offered by Representative Navarre: Page 9, following line 23: Insert a new subsection to read: "(a) This section does not apply if the attorney fees of the offeror are being paid by an insurance company." Representative Navarre moved and asked unanimous consent that Amendment No. 49 be adopted. Representative Porter objected. **The presence of Representative MacLean was noted. 1995-04-26 House Journal Page 1531 HB 158 The question being: "Shall Amendment No. 49 be adopted?" The roll was taken with the following result: CSHB 158(FIN) am Second Reading Amendment No. 49 YEAS: 17 NAYS: 21 EXCUSED: 1 ABSENT: 1 Yeas: Austerman, Brice, Brown, Davies, B.Davis, Elton, Finkelstein, Foster, Grussendorf, Kubina, Mackie, MacLean, Navarre, Nicholia, Robinson, Williams, Willis Nays: Bunde, G.Davis, Green, Hanley, Ivan, James, Kelly, Kohring, Kott, Martin, Masek, Mulder, Ogan, Parnell, Phillips, Porter, Rokeberg, Sanders, Therriault, Toohey, Vezey Excused: Barnes Absent: Moses And so, Amendment No. 49 was not adopted. Amendment Nos. 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55 and 56 were not offered. Amendment No. 57 was offered by Representative B.Davis: Page 5, lines 28-31: Delete all material. Insert "In a civil action in which punitive damages are plead, the claimant shall file with the court and serve on the Attorney General, within 60 days, a Notice of Claim of Punitive Damages. The Attorney General shall file a notice of election or rejection to join the punitive damage claim within 120 days. If the State joins the claim the court shall require that one-half of any punitive damages award be deposited into the general fund of the state. If the State joins the punitive damages claim, and the claimant is not the prevailing party, then the State shall pay one-half of the costs and attorney fees awarded against the claimant." 1995-04-26 House Journal Page 1532 HB 158 Representative B.Davis moved and asked unanimous consent that Amendment No. 57 be adopted. Representative Porter objected. The question being: "Shall Amendment No. 57 be adopted?" The roll was taken with the following result: CSHB 158(FIN) am Second Reading Amendment No. 57 YEAS: 17 NAYS: 21 EXCUSED: 1 ABSENT: 1 Yeas: Austerman, Brice, Brown, Davies, B.Davis, Elton, Finkelstein, Foster, Grussendorf, Kubina, Mackie, MacLean, Navarre, Nicholia, Robinson, Williams, Willis Nays: Bunde, G.Davis, Green, Hanley, Ivan, James, Kelly, Kohring, Kott, Martin, Masek, Mulder, Ogan, Parnell, Phillips, Porter, Rokeberg, Sanders, Therriault, Toohey, Vezey Excused: Barnes Absent: Moses And so, Amendment No. 57 was not adopted. Amendment No. 58 was offered by Representative Navarre: Page 8, line 7, after "benefits": Delete "and may not be subrogated to the rights of a claimant against a person defending a claim" Representative Navarre moved and asked unanimous consent that Amendment No. 58 be adopted. Representative Porter objected. Representative Vezey placed a call of the House on the bill. 1995-04-26 House Journal Page 1533 HB 158 The call was satisfied. The question being: "Shall Amendment No. 58 be adopted?" The roll was taken with the following result: CSHB 158(FIN) am Second Reading Amendment No. 58 YEAS: 18 NAYS: 21 EXCUSED: 1 ABSENT: 0 Yeas: Austerman, Brice, Brown, Davies, B.Davis, Elton, Finkelstein, Foster, Grussendorf, Kelly, Kubina, Mackie, MacLean, Navarre, Nicholia, Robinson, Williams, Willis Nays: Bunde, G.Davis, Green, Hanley, Ivan, James, Kohring, Kott, Martin, Masek, Moses, Mulder, Ogan, Parnell, Phillips, Porter, Rokeberg, Sanders, Therriault, Toohey, Vezey Excused: Barnes And so, Amendment No. 58 was not adopted. Amendment No. 59 was offered by Representative Robinson: Page 9, line 3, after "JUDGMENT": Insert "(a)" Page 9, following line 23: Insert new subsections to read: "(b) This section does not apply if the offeree or the real party in interest is a minor." (c) This section does not apply if the offeree is sixty five or over, and application of the rule would bankrupt the offeree. (d) A party's principle residence is exempt from execution under a judgment for costs and attorney's fees issued under this section. 1995-04-26 House Journal Page 1534HB 158 (e) This provision shall not apply in the event that the court rules that the rejection of the offer was reasonable, given the information available to the rejecting party at the time of the rejection." Representative Robinson moved and asked unanimous consent that Amendment No. 59 be adopted. Representative Vezey objected. Representative Vezey lifted the call. The question being: "Shall Amendment No. 59 be adopted?" The roll was taken with the following result: CSHB 158(FIN) am Second Reading Amendment No. 59 YEAS: 16 NAYS: 22 EXCUSED: 1 ABSENT: 1 Yeas: Austerman, Brice, Brown, Davies, B.Davis, Elton, Finkelstein, Foster, Grussendorf, Kubina, Mackie, Navarre, Nicholia, Robinson, Williams, Willis Nays: Bunde, G.Davis, Green, Hanley, Ivan, James, Kelly, Kohring, Kott, Martin, Masek, Moses, Mulder, Ogan, Parnell, Phillips, Porter, Rokeberg, Sanders, Therriault, Toohey, Vezey Excused: Barnes Absent: MacLean And so, Amendment No. 59 was not adopted. Amendment No. 60 was not offered. Amendment No. 61 was offered by Representative Finkelstein: Page 5, following line 31: Add the following new subsections to read: 1995-04-26 House Journal Page 1535 HB 158 "(e) The limit under (b) of this section does not apply to punitive damages awarded against a person who profited financially from the bad acts described in AS 09.17.020; in which case, punitive damages shall not exceed three times the amount of the profit made or reasonably estimated to be made from the bad acts, or $300,000, whichever is greater. (f) The limit under (b) of this section does not apply to punitive damages awarded by a court or jury against a defendant if the court or jury determines that the outrageous conduct involved an obviously high risk of serious bodily injury to a person." Representative Finkelstein moved and asked unanimous consent that Amendment No. 61 be adopted. Representative Porter objected. The question being: "Shall Amendment No. 61 be adopted?" The roll was taken with the following result: CSHB 158(FIN) am Second Reading Amendment No. 61 YEAS: 16 NAYS: 22 EXCUSED: 1 ABSENT: 1 Yeas: Austerman, Brice, Brown, Davies, B.Davis, Elton, Finkelstein, Foster, Grussendorf, Kubina, MacLean, Navarre, Nicholia, Robinson, Williams, Willis Nays: Bunde, G.Davis, Green, Hanley, Ivan, James, Kelly, Kohring, Kott, Martin, Masek, Moses, Mulder, Ogan, Parnell, Phillips, Porter, Rokeberg, Sanders, Therriault, Toohey, Vezey Excused: Barnes Absent: Mackie And so, Amendment No. 61 was not adopted. 1995-04-26 House Journal Page 1536 HB 158 Amendment No. 62 was offered by Representative Navarre: Page 9, lines 7 & 8: Delete "within 10 days after the service of the offer" Insert "prior to 10 days before the start of trial [WITHIN 10 DAYS AFTER THE SERVICE OF THE OFFER]" Representative Navarre moved and asked unanimous consent that Amendment No. 62 be adopted. Representative Vezey objected. The question being: "Shall Amendment No. 62 be adopted?" The roll was taken with the following result: CSHB 158(FIN) am Second Reading Amendment No. 62 YEAS: 16 NAYS: 22 EXCUSED: 1 ABSENT: 1 Yeas: Austerman, Brice, Brown, Davies, B.Davis, Elton, Finkelstein, Foster, Grussendorf, Kubina, MacLean, Navarre, Nicholia, Robinson, Williams, Willis Nays: Bunde, G.Davis, Green, Hanley, Ivan, James, Kelly, Kohring, Kott, Martin, Masek, Moses, Mulder, Ogan, Parnell, Phillips, Porter, Rokeberg, Sanders, Therriault, Toohey, Vezey Excused: Barnes Absent: Mackie And so, Amendment No. 62 was not adopted. Amendment No. 63 was offered by Representative Brice: Page 5, following line 13: Insert a new subsection to read: 1995-04-26 House Journal Page 1537 HB 158 "(f) The caps in this section do not apply to persons whose main occupation is homemaker or subsistence provider." Representative Brice moved and asked unanimous consent that Amendment No. 63 be adopted. Representative Porter objected. Representative Brice placed a call of the House. The call was satisfied. The question being: "Shall Amendment No. 63 be adopted?" The roll was taken with the following result: CSHB 158(FIN) am Second Reading Amendment No. 63 YEAS: 17 NAYS: 22 EXCUSED: 1 ABSENT: 0 Yeas: Austerman, Brice, Brown, Davies, B.Davis, Elton, Finkelstein, Foster, Grussendorf, Kubina, Mackie, MacLean, Navarre, Nicholia, Robinson, Williams, Willis Nays: Bunde, G.Davis, Green, Hanley, Ivan, James, Kelly, Kohring, Kott, Martin, Masek, Moses, Mulder, Ogan, Parnell, Phillips, Porter, Rokeberg, Sanders, Therriault, Toohey, Vezey Excused: Barnes And so, Amendment No. 63 was not adopted. Amendment No. 64 was offered by Representative Brice: Page 14, following line 31: Insert a new section to read: "*Sec. 34 This Act is repealed if, on or before January 1, 1998, the director of the division of insurance certifies to the Lieutenant governor and the revisor of statues that the liability 1995-04-26 House Journal Page 1538 HB 158 insurance rates filed with the division of insurance have not been reduced by at least one percent from those filed on January 1, 1995. In this section, "liability insurance" means insurance described under AS 21.12.070(a)(2)." Representative Brice moved and asked unanimous consent that Amendment No. 64 be adopted. Representative Porter objected. The question being: "Shall Amendment No. 64 be adopted?" The roll was taken with the following result: CSHB 158(FIN) am Second Reading Amendment No. 64 YEAS: 19 NAYS: 20 EXCUSED: 1 ABSENT: 0 Yeas: Austerman, Brice, Brown, Davies, B.Davis, Elton, Finkelstein, Foster, Grussendorf, Ivan, Kubina, Mackie, MacLean, Navarre, Nicholia, Robinson, Sanders, Williams, Willis Nays: Bunde, G.Davis, Green, Hanley, James, Kelly, Kohring, Kott, Martin, Masek, Moses, Mulder, Ogan, Parnell, Phillips, Porter, Rokeberg, Therriault, Toohey, Vezey Excused: Barnes Ivan changed from "Nay" to "Yea". And so, Amendment No. 64 was not adopted. Amendment No. 65 was offered by Representative Porter: Page 9, line 13: Delete "not more" Insert "at least five percent less [NOT MORE]" 1995-04-26 House Journal Page 1539 HB 158 Page 14, line 11: Delete "not more" Insert "at least five percent less" Representative Porter moved and asked unanimous consent that Amendment No. 65 be adopted. Representative Navarre objected and withdrew the objection. There being no further objection, Amendment No. 65 was adopted. CSHB 158(FIN) am will be in third reading on the April 27, 1995, calendar. Representative Vezey moved and asked unanimous consent that the House recess until 5:00 p.m. There being no objection, the House recessed at 12:59 p.m.