OFFICERS
K. KING BURNETT
President
P.O. Box 910
Salisbury, MD 21803-0910
PETER F. LANGROCK
Vice President
P.O. Drawer 351
Middlebury, VT 05753
ROBERT A. STEIN
Secretary
American Bar Association
750 N. Lake Shore Drive
Chicago, IL 60611
OGLESBY H. YOUNG
Treasurer
The ODS Building
601 S.W. 2nd Ave., Suite 2100
Portland, OR 97204-3158
EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE
FRED H. MILLER
Chair
University of Oklahoma
College of Law
300 Timberdell Road
Norman, OK 73019
HARRIET LANSING
Minnesota Court of Appeals
Judicial Building
25 Constitution Avenue
St. Paul, MN 55155
JUSTIN L. VIGDOR
2400 Chase Square
Rochester, NY 14604
JAMES A. WYNN, JR.
North Carolina Court of Appeals
1 West Morgan Street
Raleigh, NC 27602
EX OFFICIO MEMBERS
President
Vice President
Secretary
Treasurer
JOHN L. McCLAUGHERTY
Immediate Past President
P.O. Box 553
Charleston, WV 25322
HOWARD J. SWIBEL
Chair, Scope and Program Committee
120 S. Riverside Plaza, Suite 1200
Chicago, IL 60606
MICHAEL HOUGHTON
Chair, Legislative Committee
P.O. Box 1347
1201 N. Market St., 18th Floor
Wilmington, DE 19899
STAFF
WILLIAM H. HENNING
Executive Director
University of Missouri
School of Law
313 Hulston Hall
Columbia, MO 65211
WILLIAM J. PIERCE
Executive Director Emeritus
1505 Roxbury Road
Ann Arbor, MI 48104
MICHAEL R. KERR
Deputy Executive Director
Deputy Legislative Director/Legal Counsel
Chicago Office
J. ELIZABETH COTTON
Chief Administrative Officer
Chicago Office
JOHN M. McCABE
Legislative Director/Legal Counsel
Chicago Office
UNIFORM LAW FOUNDATION
ROBERT A. STEIN
Chair
American Bar Association
750 N. Lake Shore Drive
Chicago, IL 60611
National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws
211 East Ontario Street, Suite 1300, Chicago, Illinois 60611
312/915-0195 Facsimile 312/915-0187
December 16, 2002
Dear colleague in law reform:
For the past 111 years, the National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws has helped develop and rationalize state statutory law, by promulgating and seeking the enactment of uniform state statutes covering a wide variety of subject matter. Some of our most well-known products include the Uniform Commercial Code, the Uniform Probate Code, the Uniform Transfers to Minors Act, the Uniform Partnership Act, the Uniform Anatomical Gift Act, the Uniform Interstate Family Support Act, and many, many others.
Twice each year, our Committee on Scope and Program meets to consider proposals for new study and drafting projects. These proposals typically come from Uniform Law Commissioners, state law revision commissions, sections of the American Bar Association or state bar associations, the American Law Institute, other law reform organizations, special interest groups, and individual practitioners. The next meeting of our Committee on Scope and Program will be held on January 10, 2003, and any information or suggestions received as a result of this mailing will be forwarded for consideration by that committee on a special agenda. We need to receive communications on this subject by Friday, January 3, 2003, in order to include them in this meeting’s agenda. The Committee on Scope will meet again in August of 2003, and any submissions received after the deadline will be forwarded for review at that next meeting.
Please review the attached materials, describing our ongoing study projects, proposals received to-date, and our criteria for going forward with a particular project. We invite you to make suggestions for additional projects or provide comments on a project already ongoing. We also urge you to visit our website, www.nccusl.org, where additional materials, information, and directions on submitting a proposal can be found under the “projects under consideration” tab.
If you believe that another member or committee of your organization may have a suggestion for a uniform state law study or drafting project, or may have comments about an existing NCCUSL project, we urge you to pass a copy of this communication on to that person or committee. We are a state governmental organization, and welcome participation by all interested parties.
Sincerely,
K. King Burnett
President, NCCUSL
NCCUSL Committee on Scope and Program
NCCUSL'sResearch and DevelopmentProcess
Twice each year, the NCCUSL Committee on Scope and Program meets to consider and recommend new study and drafting projects to NCCUSL's Executive Committee.Comments and suggestions from law reform organizations, state and national bar committees, and other interested groups and individualsare welcome.We invite visitorsto review the projects we are currently studying, andthe projects that may be proposed in an upcoming Scope and Program meeting, and if you have suggestions, comments, or new proposals, to contact us with your ideas.
If you have a new proposal for a Uniform or Model Act, we recommend you also review our criteria for the designation and consideration of acts which describes the standards we use in whether to go forward with a particular project. The criteria for designation and consideration of acts may be found at the end of this document, after a description of NCCUSL’s current Study Committees and a list of pending proposals for consideration.
Please send any submissions or comments to
Current NCCUSL Study Committees
Study Committee on
Public Health Emergency Response Authority
This committee will examine state public health laws with regard to epidemic emergencies, including existing state divisions of authority.
Joint Study Committee on
Real Property Title Clearance Methods and Procedures
and Mortgagee Access to Rents from Income Producing Property
As its initial charge, this committee will research the problem of discharge and release of both residential and commercial mortgages. A law in this area could provide a mechanism for a borrower or insuring title company to obtain a quick and simple title clearance without cost to the borrower when a mortgage is paid off. In it’s second phase, the committee will study the problem of mortgagee access to rent from income property. A uniform solution to this problem would serve to ease securitization, lower transaction costs, and make mortgages more available.
Study Committee on
Misuse of Genetic Information
This study committee will propose the possible scope of an act to prevent the misuse of genetic information, to review existing legislation and to consider the implications of enactment.
Study Committee on
Conflicts of Law - Limitations Act
This study committee will determine whether the Uniform Conflicts of Laws - Limitations Act, which treats statutes of limitations as substantive rather than procedural, should be revised.
Study Committee on
Consumer Debt Counseling
This committee will consider an Act relating to consumer debt counseling including, among other topics, whether nonprofit counselors should be exempted from regulation, whether additional security for debtor's deposits is necessary, and whether and how there should be regulation of interstate operators.
Study Committee on
Electronic Payments Systems
This committee will monitor and assess the impact of electronic payment systems on the Uniform Commercial Code and other uniform acts, and if and when appropriate, to recommend whether and to what extent an act should be drafted.
Study Committee on
Internet Private Law
The study committee will consider private law issues important to the states arising from the Internet (not already assigned to existing committees of the ULC) including, among other matters, jurisdiction, privacy, and security, and to monitor federal legislative initiatives.
Study Committee on
Recognition of Foreign Judgments
This committee will review the Uniform Foreign Money Judgments Recognition Act in light of the pending international Convention on Jurisdiction and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments, to make recommendations for revisions, if appropriate, and to recommend actions to ensure the continued role of state law in this area.
Study Committee on a
Business Cooperatives Act
This committee will review state cooperative statutes, including statutes regulating farm and utility cooperatives.
Study Committee on
Expansion/Revision of the Uniform Money Services Act
The study committee will consider revision of UMSA, in light of the events of 9/11, and recent developments in this field.
Study Committee on
Omnibus Business Organization Code
This committee will investigate the feasibility of a Business Organization Code that would include both profit and non-profit, corporate and non-corporate business organizations. The study should include a survey of business organization forms, statutes and regulations, and will consult with other organizations in its efforts.
Pending New Proposals
The following proposals have been received by our office in Chicago and will be forwarded to the NCCUSL Committee on Scope and Program for review and consideration. If you have comments, examples, or suggestions regarding these subjects, or have additional proposals for study or drafting projects, please contact our Chicago office.
Proposals have been received concerning the following subjects:
Predatory Lending
Business Trusts
Limited Liability Companies
Inverse Condemnation
State Authority to Seize Terrorist Assets
Defining Mental Retardation for Death Penalty Cases
No-Call legislation and Regulation ofSpam (Junk E-Mail)
Study on Accountancy Law Review
Post-Nuptial Agreements
Family law ADR (arbitration, mediation, collaborative law)
Third party access/visitation of children
Domestic partnership/Civil union
Post-Majority Educational Support
Domestic Violence Address Confidentiality
Importation or Possession of Dangerous Animals
Marine Insurance
New Project Criteria
STATEMENT OF POLICY ESTABLISHING CRITERIA AND PROCEDURES FOR DESIGNATION AND CONSIDERATION OF ACTS (January 13, 2001)
The Conference and its committees shall conform to the following criteria and procedures in proposing or considering Acts:
1. CRITERIA.
(a) The subject matter must be appropriate for state legislation in view of the powers granted by the Constitution of the United States to the Congress. If it properly falls within the exclusive jurisdiction of the Congress, it is obviously not appropriate for legislation by the several States. However, if the subject matter is within the concurrent jurisdiction of the federal and state governments and the Congress has not pre-empted the field, it may be appropriate for action by the States and hence by the Conference.
(b) The subject matter must be such that approval of the Act by the Conference would be consistent with the objectives of the Conference, as stated in Article 1.2 of its Constitution: “to promote uniformity in the law among the several States on subjects where uniformity is desirable and practicable.”
(c) Every Act drafted by the Conference shall conform to the following requirements:
(i) there shall be an obvious reason for an Act on the subject such that its preparation will be a practical step toward uniformity of state law or at least toward minimizing its diversity;
(ii) there must be a reasonable probability that an Act, when approved, either will be accepted and enacted into law by a substantial number of jurisdictions or, if not, will promote uniformity indirectly;
(iii) the subject of the Act shall be such that uniformity of law among States will produce significant benefits to the public through improvements in the law (for example, facilitating interstate economic, social or political relations, or responding to a need common to many States as to which uniform legislation may be more effective, more efficient, and more widely and easily understood) or will avoid significant disadvantages likely to arise from diversity of state law (for example, the tendency of diverse laws to mislead, prejudice, inconvenience or otherwise adversely affect the citizens of the States in their activities or dealings in other States or with citizens of other States or in moving from State to State).
(d) Experience demonstrates that Acts to accomplish the following purposes have met with the widest acceptance by state legislatures;
(i) Acts to facilitate the flow of commercial transactions across state lines, such as the Uniform Commercial Code;
(ii) Acts to avoid conflict of laws when the laws of more than one State may apply to a transaction or series of transactions, such as the Uniform Act on Transfers to Minors, the Uniform Certification of Questions of Law Act, the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act, the Uniform Interstate Family Support Act, and the Uniform Attendance of Out of State Witnesses Act;
(iii) Acts without substantial interstate implications but conceived and drafted to fill emergent needs, to modernize antiquated concepts, or to codify the common law, such as the Uniform Acts on Simultaneous Death, Limited Partnership, Partnership, Limited Liability Company, Rules of Evidence, Common Trust Fund, Principal and Income, and Fraudulent Transfers.
(e) Acts may promote uniformity indirectly as well as by substantially verbatim adoptions, as, for example, by:
(i) extensive adoptions in principle, such as the Uniform Alcoholism and Intoxication Treatment Act;
(ii) impact on case law and teaching practices, such as the Uniform Rules of Evidence;
(iii) gradually increasing adoptions, either in statutes or in case law, of particular sections or parts of a Uniform or Model Act addressing specific problems within the larger area to which the Act is directed, as for example, the Uniform Acts on Intestacy, Wills and Donative Transfers, Testamentary Additions to Trusts, Disclaimer of Property Interests, Statutory Rule Against Perpetuities, International Wills, Succession without Administration, Trustee Powers, Estate Tax Apportionment, Guardianship and Protective Proceedings, Durable Power of Attorney, and Nonprobate Transfers on Death, which address specific and discrete problems within the larger area to which the Uniform Probate Code is directed.
(f) As a general rule, the Conference should consider past experience in determining future projects and should avoid consideration of subjects that are:
(i) entirely novel and with regard to which neither legislative nor administrative experience is available;
(ii) controversial because of disparities in social, economic or political policies or philosophies among the various States; and
(iii) of purely local or state concern and without substantial interstate implications unless conceived and drafted to fill emergent needs or to modernize antiquated concepts.
2. DESIGNATION OF ACTS AS UNIFORM OR MODEL
The above criteria are equally applicable to Uniform and Model Acts. In determining whether an Act should be designated as a “Uniform” Act or a “Model” Act, the following procedures and criteria should be applied:
(a) The Executive Committee, in appointing a special committee for the consideration of an Act, may do so without indicating whether the product will be a “Uniform” or “Uniform Law Commissioners’ Model” Act. The committee may be designated initially as the “Special Committee on [subject matter] Act” and any drafts circulated as “Uniform Law Commissioners’ [subject matter] Act.”