Written by Erin Slusser, Esq.
Edited by Janeen Koch, Esq.
KPM LAW is pleased to offer its special Legislative update. This update contains summaries of bills of interest to our readers that were enacted by the General Assembly in its 2016 session and that took effect as of July 1, 2016. This information is taken from the Summary of the 2016 Session of the General Assembly published by the Division of Legislative Services.
The abbreviations used are as follows: HB – House Bill; SB – Senate Bill. If you wish to read the entire text of a bill to see how it changed the previously existing law, you may visit the Virginia General Assembly Legislative Services website at http://virginiageneralassembly.gov.
Automobile, commercial liability, and homeowners insurance policies; notices: This bill restores the ability of insurers, when sending certain types of notices, including notice of cancellation or nonrenewal of a motor vehicle, commercial liability, or homeowners insurance policy, to use mailing methods for which a certificate of mailing is obtained from the United States Postal Service, provided that certificates of bulk mail are not permissible. The measure also clarifies that Intelligent Mail Barcode Tracing is a permitted first-class mail tracking method and clarifies that insurers are required to maintain records regarding the sending of such notices for one year, regardless of the method used to send the notice. See HB 31; Va. Code Ann. 38.2-231.
Structured Settlement Protection Act; amends Act so obligor and issuer may rely on court order. This bill amends the Structured Settlement Protection Act (the Act) to provide that the structured settlement obligor and the annuity issuer may rely on a court order approving a transfer of structured settlement payment rights in redirecting periodic payments to an assignee or transferee in accordance with the order. The measure provides that upon entry of such an order the structured settlement obligor and the annuity issuer shall be discharged and released from any and all liability for the transferred redirected payments as to all parties except the transferee or an assignee designated by the transferee. The discharge and release of the structured settlement obligor and the annuity issuer shall not be affected by the failure of any party to the transfer to comply with the Act or with the court order approving the transfer. The measure also provides that an application for approval of a structured settlement transfer shall be brought in the circuit court of the city or county in which the payee is domiciled at the time the transfer agreement was signed or, if the payee is not domiciled in Virginia, then the application may be brought in the court in Virginia that approved the structured settlement agreement. The payee is required to appear in person at the hearing unless the court finds that good cause exists to excuse such an appearance. The measure also provides that a court may hear an application for transfer of payment rights under a structured settlement despite the existence of terms in the underlying structured settlement agreement that purport to restrict or preclude the payee’s right or power to sell, assign, or encumber structured settlement payment rights. An application for approval of a transfer is required to include a summary of information regarding prior transfers and notice of the hearing. The period in which responses to the application must be filed with the court is changed from not less than 15 days after service of the notice to five days prior to the hearing. Existing provisions that provide for approval of a transfer of structured settlement payment rights by a responsible administrative authority are deleted from the Act. See HB 52; Va. Code Ann. 59.1-475 through 59.1-477.1.
Transmission of case papers to appellate court; acceptability of electronic case papers. The bill allows, upon agreement between the chief judge of the general district court and the clerk of the circuit court, for electronic transmission of case papers between the courts for civil cases appealed from general district to circuit court and from circuit court back to district court in cases where that might be required. See HB 64; Va. Code Ann. 16.1-112,
Passing stopped school buses; rebutting presumption, mailing of summons: This bill provides that a locality that has authorized by ordinance the installation and operation of a video-monitoring system on school buses for recording violations of unlawfully passing a stopped school bus may execute a summons for such violation by mailing a copy of the summons to the owner of a vehicle that unlawfully passed a stopped school bus. The bill also provides a means by which the existing presumption that the registered owner of the vehicle was the vehicle operator at the time of the violation can be rebutted and requires that this information be included with the mailing of the summons. The bill gives the summoned person 30 business days from the mailing of the summons to inspect information collected by a video-monitoring system in connection with the violation. See HB 168; Va. Code Ann. 46.2-844.
Hearsay; exception; children; certain felonies. This bill establishes a hearsay exception to certain out-of-court statements made by a child under the age of 13 at the time of trial in cases involving a violation or attempted violation of an “offense against children.” The bill contains a list of certain felony sex offenses and certain felony offenses resulting in physical injury that fall within the definition of an “offense against children.” The court must hold a hearing prior to trial and find that the time, content, and totality of the circumstances provide sufficient indicia of reliability so as to render such statement inherently trustworthy. The bill provides factors for the court to consider in making such a determination. Notice of intent to offer the statement and the particulars of the statement must be given to the adverse party at least 14 days in advance of the proceedings. See HB 227; Va. Code Ann. 19.2-268.3.
Authenticity and reasonableness of medical bills; presumption; who may identify and provide testimony. This bill permits a plaintiff’s guardian, agent under an advance directive, or agent under a power of attorney to identify a medical bill and provide testimony on the bill to establish a rebuttable presumption of authenticity and reasonableness of the bill where the court finds the plaintiff is unable to provide testimony. Current law requires the plaintiff to identify and provide testimony on the bill. See 232; Va. Code Ann. 8.0-1-413.01.
Insurance Notices. This bill clarifies and updates provisions regarding notices from insurance companies to applicants and policyholders. The measure amends the requirement that insurers give insureds notice when increasing the premium on their policies due to accidents to clarify that insurers are required to inform insureds that they have 60 days to seek a review by the Bureau of Insurance of the application of a surcharge. The notice requirements regarding uninsured motorist coverage (UM/UIM) is updated to allow the practice under which insurers give applicants the opportunity to request UM/UIM limits equal to their liability limits or to request lower UM/UIM limits, as long as the lower limits are at least $25,000/$50,000/$20,000. Other changes clarify which notices are required to be given on new business policies only rather than on new and renewal business policies. See HB 307; Va. Code Ann. 38.2-1905.
Nonsuits; tolling of limitations; contractual limitation periods. Provides that a voluntary nonsuit tolls both a contractual limitation period and a statutorily governed limitation period. See HB 441; Va Code Ann. 8.01-229.
Attorney-issued summons; proof of payment to clerk’s office. This bill provides that a photocopy of a payment instrument and a photocopy of the accompanying letter sent to the clerk’s office to show payment of service of process fees for an attorney-issued summons is sufficient proof of payment for a sheriff’s office to accept and serve such summons. See HB 496; Va. Code Ann. 8.01-407.
Jurisdiction of General District Court; Arbitration: This bill establishes that the general district courts have concurrent jurisdiction with the circuit courts to submit to arbitration where the amount in controversy is within the jurisdictional limits of the general district court. The bill provides that any party that disagrees with an order by a general district court granting an application to compel arbitration may appeal the decision to circuit court. See HB 641; Va. Code Ann. 8.01-577, 8.01-581.014, 8.01-581.016 and 16.1-77.