Legislature(2003 - 2004)
2003-05-19 House Journal
Full Journal pdf2003-05-19 House Journal Page 1923 SB 93 The following was read the second time: CS FOR SENATE BILL NO. 93(JUD) am "An Act relating to limitations on actions to quiet title to, eject a person from, or recover real property or the possession of it; relating to adverse possession; and providing for an effective date." with the: Journal Page JUD RPT 1DP 2DNP 4NR 1882 FN1: ZERO(CED) 1882 Amendment No. 1 was offered by Representatives Gara and Samuels: Page 2, line 25, following "state.": Insert: "This subsection does not limit or expand the rights of a state or political subdivision under adverse possession or prescription as the law existed on the day before the effective date of this subsection." Representative Gara moved and asked unanimous consent that Amendment No. 1 be adopted. There being no objection, it was so ordered. Representative Coghill moved and asked unanimous consent that CSSB 93(JUD) am H be considered engrossed, advanced to third reading, and placed on final passage. There being no objection, it was so ordered. CSSB 93(JUD) am H was read the third time. The question being: "Shall CSSB 93(JUD) am H pass the House?" The roll was taken with the following result: 2003-05-19 House Journal Page 1924 CSSB 93(JUD) am H Third Reading Final Passage YEAS: 28 NAYS: 5 EXCUSED: 2 ABSENT: 5 Yeas: Anderson, Berkowitz, Chenault, Cissna, Coghill, Crawford, Dahlstrom, Fate, Foster, Gara, Gatto, Guttenberg, Hawker, Heinze, Holm, Kerttula, Kookesh, Kott, Lynn, Meyer, Morgan, Moses, Rokeberg, Samuels, Seaton, Whitaker, Wilson, Wolf Nays: Gruenberg, Masek, Ogg, Stoltze, Weyhrauch Excused: Croft, Joule Absent: Harris, Kapsner, Kohring, McGuire, Williams And so, CSSB 93(JUD) am H passed the House. Representative Coghill moved and asked unanimous consent that the roll call on the passage of the bill be considered the roll call on the effective date clause. There being no objection, it was so ordered. Representative Gruenberg gave notice of reconsideration of the vote on CSSB 93(JUD) am H. Representative Samuels moved and asked unanimous consent that reconsideration of CSSB 93(JUD) am H be taken up on the same day. Representative Gruenberg objected. **The presence of Representatives Kohring and McGuire was noted. Representative Gruenberg withdrew the objection. There being no further objection, it was so ordered. SB 93 The following was again before the House in third reading: 2003-05-19 House Journal Page 1925 CS FOR SENATE BILL NO. 93(JUD) am H "An Act relating to limitations on actions to quiet title to, eject a person from, or recover real property or the possession of it; relating to adverse possession; and providing for an effective date." The question to be reconsidered: "Shall CSSB 93(JUD) am H pass the House?" The roll was taken with the following result: CSSB 93(JUD) am H--RECONSIDERATION Third Reading Final Passage YEAS: 27 NAYS: 4 EXCUSED: 2 ABSENT: 7 Yeas: Anderson, Chenault, Cissna, Coghill, Crawford, Dahlstrom, Fate, Foster, Gatto, Gruenberg, Guttenberg, Hawker, Heinze, Holm, Kohring, Kookesh, Kott, Lynn, McGuire, Meyer, Morgan, Moses, Rokeberg, Samuels, Seaton, Whitaker, Wolf Nays: Masek, Ogg, Stoltze, Weyhrauch Excused: Croft, Joule Absent: Berkowitz, Gara, Harris, Kapsner, Kerttula, Williams, Wilson And so, CSSB 93(JUD) am H passed the House on reconsideration. Representative Coghill moved and asked unanimous consent that the roll call on the passage of the bill be considered the roll call on the effective date clause. There being no objection, it was so ordered. CSSB 93(JUD) am H was referred to the Chief Clerk for engrossment.