Video & Transcript Research : 'statutory probate courts'

Page 1 of 500
TX

Texas 89th 2nd C.S.

Judiciary & Civil Jurisprudence May 14th, 2025

Judiciary & Civil Jurisprudence

Transcript Highlights:
  • probate courts.
  • probate courts match those of statutory county and district courts.
  • However, it did not clearly... ...statutory probate courts matched those of statutory county and district
  • probate court counties then create new statutory probate... ...and it helps the statutory probate court
  • counties then create new statutory probate courts, and we hope are supporting this.
Bills: SB1015, SB2933
Summary: The Committee on Judiciary and Civil Jurisprudence heard testimony on Senate Bill 1015, which would clarify that the comptroller is responsible for distributing excess judicial fund payments back to statutory probate courts. Judge Guy Herman testified in support, saying the bill would help ensure probate courts receive funding they are entitled to, while Ed Heimlich testified against the bill with broad criticism of probate courts and judicial practices. The committee then heard Senate Bill 2933, which would add elder abuse training to required judicial education for several categories of judges and judicial officers; Dr. Bruce Hargrave supported the bill, citing the prevalence and underreporting of elder abuse and the need for judges to recognize warning signs. No votes were taken on either of those bills, and SB 2933 was left pending. The committee then reconsidered Senate Bill 38, an eviction-related bill, and Vice Chair Hayes described two agreed floor amendments: one limiting the summary disposition procedure to forcible entry and detainer cases involving squatters, and another requiring a notice to pay rent or vacate for tenants who had been timely payers but missed a payment. After discussion, the committee voted 6-4 to report SB 38 without amendments. The committee also adopted or advanced a series of other bills and resolutions, including SB 293, SB 1141, SB 1448, SB 1536, SB 1558, SB 1838, SB 1940, SB 2127, SB 53, SB 251, SB 311, SB 387, SB 441 (with a substitute), SB 1164, SB 1335, SB 1574 (with a substitute), SB 1719, SB 1760, SB 1839, SB 1923 (with a substitute), SB 2807, and SJR 27 (with a substitute). Most measures were reported favorably on largely party-line or near-unanimous votes, with a few close votes on SB 942, SB 311, SB 2807, and SJR 27. SB 942, relating to retroactive child support beginning at conception, initially failed 5-5 but was reconsidered and then passed 6-5. The committee adjourned after completing its agenda.
TX

Texas 89th Regular

Judiciary & Civil Jurisprudence May 14th, 2025

Judiciary & Civil Jurisprudence

Transcript Highlights:
  • probate courts.
  • probate courts match those of statutory county and district courts.
  • However, it did not clearly... ...statutory probate courts matched those of statutory county and district
  • Guy Herman, presiding statutory probate court judge here in the state of Texas.
  • probate court counties then create new statutory probate... ...and it helps the statutory probate court
Bills: SB1015, SB2933
TX

Texas 89th Regular

Jurisprudence Mar 26th, 2025

Jurisprudence

Transcript Highlights:
  • I'm Guy Herman, statutory probate court judge here in Travis County.
  • I happen to be the presiding statutory probate court judge.
  • All the statutory probate courts—there's 24 of those.
  • And that's why I'm in strong support of this, and all the statutory probate courts endorse it.
  • And that's why I'm in strong support of this, and all the statutory probate courts.
Summary: The Senate Committee on Jurisprudence heard several family-law and probate bills. Senate Bill 2052 would codify a rebuttable presumption that a parent acts in the best interest of a child and require clear and convincing evidence to overcome that presumption in disputes involving non-parents; the author and several witnesses supported the bill as a clarification of existing case law, while one witness suggested refining the modification language. Public testimony was closed and the bill was left pending. The committee also heard Senate Bill 1923, which would allow child support to follow a child placed temporarily with kin or fictive kin under a parental child safety placement or authorization agreement; the bill’s author and a grandparent caregiver testified in support, while one witness suggested the Attorney General could handle the change administratively. That bill was also left pending. Senate Bill 1838 would standardize fee schedules and compensation rules for attorneys ad litem and related court-appointed counsel in DFPS child-protection cases. The author said the bill would clarify unclear current law, and witnesses from the Texas Indigent Defense Commission and family-defense bar supported it, though one asked that expert-witness expenses be expressly included. Senate Bill 387 would raise the bond requirement for county judges handling guardianship proceedings to at least $500,000; the author described it as a refiling of a prior bill that passed unanimously but was vetoed, and a statutory probate judge testified in support. Senate Bill 1839 would require original or paper wills to be delivered to the transferee court when probate proceedings are transferred; the committee substitute broadened the delivery methods, and the district clerk witness supported the change. All three bills were left pending. The committee also took up Senate Bill 1536, which had previously been voted out with the wrong committee substitute; members reconsidered the vote, adopted the corrected substitute, and then voted 3-0 to report the bill favorably to the full Senate, with local and contested calendar certification. Finally, Senate Bill 1940 would create a transfer-on-death mechanism for manufactured homes classified as personal property, similar to existing tools for real property and vehicles; the author and an estate-planning attorney testified that it would streamline transfers and reduce probate costs. A non-substantive committee substitute was still being prepared, and the bill was left pending.
TX
Transcript Highlights:
  • I'm Guy Herman statutory probate court judge here in Travis County.
  • I happen to be the presiding statutory probate court judge.
  • probate court judges.
  • All the statutory probate courts, there's 24. those.
  • And that's why I'm in strong support of this. all the statutory probate courts.
TX
Transcript Highlights:
  • We have, I think it's 14 statutory probate court judges. Oh, I'm off.
  • There are 24 statutory probate court judges, but those are in the larger jurisdictions.
  • I'm the presiding statutory probate court judge of Probate Court Number One in Travis County, but I'm
  • also the presiding statutory probate court judge statewide, elected by...
  • Both Democrats and Republican statutory probate courts.
TX

Texas 89th Regular

S/C on Family & Fiduciary Relationships May 5th, 2025

S/C on Family & Fiduciary Relationships

Transcript Highlights:
  • I'm Guy Herman, presiding statutory probate court judge, and I want to thank our representative for working
  • probate courts were always criticized about the fees that are being collected here by our clerks and
  • Statutory probate court judges, which are in the large. Ten largest metropolitan areas.
  • I'm Guy Herm, representing Statutory Probate Courts of the State of Texas.
  • Chair calls Judge Guy Herman. and the Texas statutory probate courts and testifying for them. bill. get
TX
Transcript Highlights:
  • Estate and Probate Institute, also known as TREP.
  • However, if a party to a probate proceeding files a motion to assign a ... assignment to a probate judge
  • traveling probate judge, they will have to pay for it.
  • The court would be required to ...
  • A court order can then be issued.
TX

Texas 89th Regular

Jurisprudence (Part I) Apr 9th, 2025

Jurisprudence

Transcript Highlights:
  • Estate and Probate Institute, also known as TREP.
  • Senate Bill 302 traveling probate judge reimbursement is a rural county.
  • However, if a party to a probate proceedings files a motion to assign of assignment to a probate judge
  • There is a free option if it's heard in the existing county judge's court.
  • A traveling probate judge, they're going to have to pay it.
TX

Texas 89th Regular

Jurisprudence Apr 9th, 2025

Jurisprudence

Transcript Highlights:
  • Estate and Probate Institute, also known as T-REP.
  • Currently, most uncontested probate cases are heard by the county judge.
  • However, if a party to a probate proceeding files a motion to assign a probate judge to hear a contested
  • If it's contested, then it can go into the district court free.
  • Only 12 counties with a permanent probate judge.
Summary: The committee heard several probate, family law, judicial, property, and contract-related bills. Senate Bill 1335, relating to decedents’ estates, would remove outdated references to a clerk’s certificate, allow courts to remove personal representatives on their own motion with notice by qualified delivery method, and add independent administrators to provisions that referenced only independent executors; an estate-planning attorney testified in support, and the bill was left pending. Senate Bill 1760, concerning guardianship transfer fees and procedures, was described as setting a $45 filing fee for transferred guardianship cases and clarifying completion and dismissal procedures; it received no testimony and was left pending. Senate Bill 2127 would shorten the eligibility period for retired judges to serve as visiting judges from eight years to six, restrict practice in their assigned region for two years, and require conflict-related certification; it also was left pending without testimony. Senate Bill 302 would shift the cost of a traveling probate judge to the requesting estate or parties rather than the county; one witness registered in favor, no one testified, and the bill was left pending. The committee then considered a committee substitute for Senate Bill 252, which would clarify the parental presumption in conservatorship cases, require non-parents seeking relief against a parent to file an affidavit showing significant impairment to the child if relief is denied, require courts to state specific findings when overcoming the presumption, confirm the clear-and-convincing standard, and clarify that agreed prior orders do not defeat the presumption. The substitute was explained as consensus language from a work group, public testimony was reopened, and the bill was left pending. Senate Bill 1734, on deed fraud, would create a streamlined ex parte process for property owners to have fraudulent deeds declared void, modeled on the fraudulent lien statute; county clerk and title association representatives testified that it would provide a low-cost self-help remedy for a growing problem, and the bill was left pending subject to the chair. Senate Bill 1975 would prevent Texas contractors from being forced to litigate disputes in foreign jurisdictions and require disputes to be handled in the county where the project is located; it was presented as a repeat of a previously vetoed bill and was left pending. Finally, the committee took up a substitute for Senate Bill 1940, concerning transfer-on-death style beneficiary designations for manufactured homes. The substitute would allow one or more beneficiaries instead of only one, transfer the interest to surviving designated beneficiaries who survive by 120 hours, extend the application period for transfer to 365 days, void the designation if not timely filed, and require mailing by certified or registered mail with return receipt requested. The substitute was adopted without objection. The committee then recessed subject to the call of the chair.
TX
Bills: SB9, SB7, SB17, SB4, SB1, HB4
Summary: The Senate briefly convened and received a message from the House stating that the House was taking a vote. No bills, motions, or substantive policy matters were discussed in the exchange. Pursuant to a previously adopted motion, the Senate then adjourned until 7 p.m. on Thursday, August 21.
OK

Oklahoma 2026 Regular Session

Judiciary Apr 7th, 2026 at 01:30 pm

Judiciary

Transcript Highlights:
  • The district courts are really struggling with getting bailiffs and this increases their salary.
  • House Bill 3970 is just going to authorize court reporters to be able to use the machine where you speak
  • House Bill 3177 is a parody for the court for reporters for the corporation commission, similar to what
  • We've created the special judge classification based upon caseload, but that's purely statutory because
  • it's statutory.
TX

Texas 89th 2nd C.S.

State Affairs Aug 15th, 2025

State Affairs

Transcript Highlights:
  • burden our court system further.
  • That case is sitting at the 15th Court.
  • The court is going to decide very soon, and every court who's looked at...
  • The court is going to decide very soon, and every court who's looked at this has said most of the documents
  • This is the omnibus courts bill.
Bills: SB6, SB7, SB8, SB11, SB12, SB13, SB15, SB17
Summary: The committee first took up Senate Bill 8, the Texas Women's Privacy Act, and heard extensive public testimony both for and against the measure. Supporters, including representatives of Texas Values and Texas Values Action, argued the bill was needed to protect women’s privacy and safety in restrooms, locker rooms, showers, prisons, domestic violence shelters, and other government-controlled spaces, and said it would provide clear, sex-based rules. Opponents, including many transgender Texans, civil rights advocates, clergy, business and public safety voices, and others, argued the bill would invite harassment, gender policing, lawsuits, and invasive inspections, while harming trans, intersex, and gender-nonconforming people as well as cisgender women who do not fit stereotypes. Several witnesses said the bill would conflict with federal law or prison standards, worsen safety in shelters and prisons, and hurt Texas’s reputation and economy. The chair repeatedly noted the compressed special-session schedule and said flood relief remained the session’s top priority. Public testimony on SB 8 was eventually closed, and the bill was left pending. The committee then moved to Senate Bill 6, dealing with consumable hemp product restrictions. Testimony on SB 6 focused on whether the bill went too far in restricting hemp-derived THC products. Opponents argued hemp and THC have medical and economic value, that the bill would criminalize conduct and burden courts, and that regulation—not prohibition—was the better approach. Some witnesses supported tighter rules such as testing, child-resistant packaging, and limits on marketing to children, but still opposed the bill’s broad THC ban, higher fees, and age restrictions. Several speakers emphasized benefits for veterans, chronic pain patients, and small businesses, and warned that prohibition would push consumers toward the illicit market. The committee heard the testimony and then continued with additional witnesses, with no final vote or disposition reported in the excerpt.
TX
Transcript Highlights:
  • Is anyone that looks transgender going to be detained or need to go to court?
  • burden our court system further.
  • That case has had its hearing and is sitting at the 15th court.
  • The court is going to decide very soon, and every court who's looked at this has said that most of the
  • This is the omnibus courts bill. There is...