California 2019-2020 Regular Session Status: Passed Assembly

AB 1795 — Civil actions: unlawful detainer: court records.

Last action — In committee: Set, first hearing. Hearing canceled at the request of author.

Track this bill free

No card. One bill, free forever — alerts when it moves.

  1. ✓
    Introduced
  2. ✓
    In Committee
  3. 3
    Passed Assembly
  4. 4
    Passed Senate
  5. 5
    To Executive
  6. 6
    Enacted

This bill died with 2019-2020 Regular Session. It reached “Passed Assembly” and never advanced before the session ended, so it can no longer move — a new version would have to be reintroduced in the current session.

This bill is no longer active — its legislative session has ended, so there is no live prognosis. It would have to be reintroduced in the current session to move again.

Summary

Existing law provides summary proceedings for obtaining possession of real property in specified cases, including a case in which an owner of real property seeks to displace, on the ground of unlawful detainer, a tenant or lessee of accommodations that the owner has withdrawn from rent or lease. Existing law requires the clerk of the court to allow access to the records of those summary proceedings, as specified. This bill would prohibit the clerk from allowing access to the records of an unlawful detainer action described above, except as specified. The bill would require the owner in such a case to identify the type of unlawful detainer action in the caption of the owner's complaint. Existing constitutional provisions require that a statute that limits the right of access to the meetings of public bodies or the writings of public officials and agencies be adopted with findings demonstrating the interest protected by the limitation and the need for protecting that interest. This bill would make legislative findings to that effect.

Bill Text

Action History

  1. In committee: Set, first hearing. Hearing canceled at the request of author.

  2. Referred to Com. on JUD.

  3. In Senate. Read first time. To Com. on RLS. for assignment.

  4. Read third time. Passed. Ordered to the Senate. (Ayes 43. Noes 22. Page 1636.)

  5. Read second time. Ordered to third reading.

  6. From committee: Do pass. (Ayes 9. Noes 3.) (April 30).

  7. Re-referred to Com. on JUD.

  8. From committee chair, with author's amendments: Amend, and re-refer to Com. on JUD. Read second time and amended.

  9. Referred to Com. on JUD.

  10. Read first time.

  11. From printer. May be heard in committee March 25.

  12. Introduced. To print.

Sponsors

  • Kamlager-Dove · Primary

Sponsorship breakdown

Export CSV (upgrade) →

1 sponsors · 0 co-sponsors · 121 not signed on · 9 voted No

Sponsors (1)

  • Kamlager-Dove

Co-sponsors (0)

None.

Not signed on (121)

121 members have not signed on to this bill.

Show all 121 →

"Not signed on" means a member has not sponsored or co-sponsored this bill — it does not imply opposition. Members flagged Voted No have a recorded No vote on this bill.

Whip count is in markup. Polling the chamber and every recorded vote this session. Only the first open is slow. It’s instant for you after this. Calling the roll · Tallying · Engrossing

Votes

AB 1795 Kamlager-Dove Assembly Third Reading

Passed 43 Yea · 22 Nay · 15 Other
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 271308
Democratic 16207
Republican 0700
Total 4322015
% of votes cast 54%28%0%19%
How each member voted (80)
Member Party Vote
Smith — Yea
Gonzalez — Yea
Chau — Yea
Bloom — Yea
Santiago — Yea
Chiu — Yea
Gray — Yea
Holden — Yea
Eggman — Yea
Maienschein — Yea
Jones-Sawyer — Yea
Quirk — Yea
Mullin — Yea
Friedman — Yea
Ting — Yea
Kamlager-Dove — Yea
Levine — Yea
McCarty — Yea
Low — Yea
Nazarian — Yea
Wood — Yea
Rendon — Yea
Chu — Yea
O'Donnell — Yea
Weber — Yea
Salas — Nay
Kiley — Nay
Mayes — Nay
Mathis — Nay
Bigelow — Nay
Cooley — Nay
Cunningham — Nay
Diep — Nay
Voepel — Nay
Obernolte — Nay
Daly — Nay
Melendez — Nay
Waldron — Nay
Burke — Not Voting
Cooper — Not Voting
Gloria — Not Voting
Rodriguez — Not Voting
Brough — Not Voting
Medina — Not Voting
Frazier — Not Voting
Cristina Garcia — Not Voting
Eduardo Garcia — Yea
Mark Stone — Yea
Aguiar-Curry, Cecilia M. Democratic Yea
Arambula, Joaquin Democratic Not Voting
Bauer-Kahan, Rebecca Democratic Yea
Berman, Marc Democratic Yea
Boerner, Tasha Democratic Yea
Bonta, Mia Democratic Yea
Calderon, Lisa Democratic Yea
Carrillo, Juan Democratic Yea
Cervantes, Sabrina Democratic Nay
Fong, Mike Democratic Nay
Gabriel, Jesse Democratic Yea
Gipson, Mike A. Democratic Not Voting
Grayson, Timothy S. Democratic Not Voting
Irwin, Jacqui Democratic Yea
Kalra, Ash Democratic Yea
Limón, Monique Democratic Yea
Muratsuchi, Al Democratic Not Voting
Petrie-Norris, Cottie Democratic Yea
Quirk-Silva, Sharon Democratic Not Voting
Ramos, James C. Democratic Not Voting
Reyes, Eloise Gómez Democratic Yea
Rivas, Robert Democratic Yea
Rivas, Robert Democratic Yea
Rubio, Blanca E. Democratic Not Voting
Wicks, Buffy Democratic Yea
Chen, Phillip Republican Nay
Choi, Steven S. Republican Nay
Dahle, Megan Republican Nay
Flora, Heath Republican Nay
Gallagher, James Republican Nay
Lackey, Tom Republican Nay
Patterson, Joe Republican Nay

Official roll call →

Subjects

housing civil-rights
Cross-referencing the record. Reading this bill against every other bill in the corpus by meaning, not keywords. Only the first open is slow. It’s instant for you after this. Matching · Ranking · Engrossing

Frequently asked questions

What does AB 1795 do?
Existing law provides summary proceedings for obtaining possession of real property in specified cases, including a case in which an owner of real property seeks to displace, on the ground of unlawful detainer, a tenant or lessee of accommodations that the owner has withdrawn from rent or lease. Existing law requires the clerk of the court to allow access to the records of those summary proceedings, as specified. This bill would prohibit the clerk from allowing access to the records of an unlawful detainer action described above, except as specified. The bill would require the owner in such a case to identify the type of unlawful detainer action in the caption of the owner's complaint. Existing constitutional provisions require that a statute that limits the right of access to the meetings of public bodies or the writings of public officials and agencies be adopted with findings demonstrating the interest protected by the limitation and the need for protecting that interest. This bill would make legislative findings to that effect.
Who sponsors AB 1795?
AB 1795 is sponsored by Kamlager-Dove.
What is the current status of AB 1795?
This bill died with 2019-2020 Regular Session. It reached “Passed Assembly” and never advanced before the session ended, so it can no longer move — a new version would have to be reintroduced in the current session.
Where can I track AB 1795?
Track AB 1795 free on One Click Politics — get push/email alerts when it moves.

Make your voice heard on AB 1795

Find the representatives who decide this bill and tell them where you stand — for yourself, or mobilize your whole list in one click with One Click Politics advocacy software.

Find my representatives → Run a campaign

Stay ahead of AB 1795

Last checked for changes 3 months ago · updated continuously

One Click Politics tracks every bill in Congress and all 50 states.

Track this bill →