HB 499 - DISPOSITION OF BUSINESS ASSETS Number 1141 CHAIR ROKEBERG announced that the next order of business would be, HOUSE BILL NO. 499, "An Act relating to the sale, lease, exchange, or other disposition of business property and assets." [Before the committee was committee substitute (CS) for HB 499, version 22-LS1490\S, Bannister, 4/5/02, which was adopted as a work draft on 4/5/02.] Number 1162 REPRESENTATIVE COGHILL moved to adopt the proposed committee substitute (CS) for HB 499, version 22-LS1490\B, Bannister, 4/19/02, as a work draft. Number 1181 REPRESENTATIVE BERKOWITZ objected for the purpose of discussion. Number 1190 HEATHER M. NOBREGA, Staff to Representative Norman Rokeberg, House Judiciary Standing Committee, Alaska State Legislature, explained that Version B has been tailored to more specifically address the issues raised by the Savage Arms, Inc. v. Western Auto Supply Co. case. Version B specifically rejects the "continuity of enterprise" theory, and places in statute the generally accepted law - from the [American Law Institute's Restatement (Third) of the Law of Torts ("Third Restatement of Torts")] - regarding successor liability. CHAIR ROKEBERG noted that [the provisions] of Version B are retroactive. MS. NOBREGA confirmed that. CHAIR ROKEBERG said: So what we're doing here is, by slimming this thing down, we're overcoming some of the objections that were raised by the trial attorneys as to the general applicability (indisc.) other areas of contract law and so forth that went further afield [and] might have some unintended consequences we weren't ... [able to] specifically identify at this juncture. And because of the need for speed, I felt is was wise to take this route. Also, because of the briefs provided by all parties, I think that we're on ... very sound foundation as to the applicability provisions in the bill. REPRESENTATIVE BERKOWITZ asked for an explanation of why the title was changed. MS. NOBREGA said she had not requested a title change, and surmised that the drafter must have decided to change the title. CHAIR ROKEBERG asked Representative Berkowitz if he is concerned that the new title is "too loose." REPRESENTATIVE BERKOWITZ said, "Let me just put it this way: I'm suspicious of titles at this time of year." CHAIR ROKEBERG opined that [the title] is a little too broad. REPRESENTATIVE BERKOWITZ said: "It doesn't specify that what we're doing now is a fairly narrow modification to the "continuity of enterprise" exception to the doctrine of successor liability." Number 1316 REPRESENTATIVE BERKOWITZ made a motion to adopt Conceptual Amendment 1, to "tighten this title so tight that no blowtorch, that no crowbar can get into it." CHAIR ROKEBERG noted that Version B must first be adopted as a work draft. Number 1339 REPRESENTATIVE BERKOWITZ withdrew his objection. CHAIR ROKEBERG announced that Version B was before the committee. Number 1348 REPRESENTATIVE BERKOWITZ restated his motion to adopt Conceptual Amendment 1. There being no objection, Conceptual Amendment 1 was adopted. Number 1362 REPRESENTATIVE JAMES moved to report the proposed committee substitute (CS) for HB 499, version 22-LS1490\B, Bannister, 4/19/02, as amended, out of committee with individual recommendations and the accompanying zero fiscal note. There being no objection, CSHB 499(JUD) was reported out of the House Judiciary Standing Committee.