Store Research

Assembly Bill 3312 (Wright 1988)

Chapter 890, Statutes of 1988 - AB 3312

Some bill research does not include the Governor's file because at the time we researched the bill, the sitting Governor had not released his chaptered bill file. If the Governor's file is not included with this particular research, please contact our office (1-800-666-1917 or quote@legintent.com) and we will be happy to provide this file at no charge if it is available.

Assembly Bill 3312 was introduced by Assembly Member Cathie Wright on February 12, 1988 and was sponsored by the Family Law section of the State Bar of California.  (See Exhibits #1a and #11, document PE-5)  Assembly Bill 3312 was a single-section bill that only enacted former Civil Code section 4515, the historical derivation of current Family Code section 2337.  (See Exhibit #1e)

Assembly Bill 3312 was assigned to both the Senate and Assembly Judiciary Committees for consideration of the policy issues raised by the bill.  (See Exhibits #3a, #3b, and #5)  The bill was amended on three occasions while in the Assembly and in the Senate on March 24, April 19, and June 6 of 1988.  (See Exhibits #1b through #1d and #2)  After approval by the Legislature on August 29, 1988, Governor George Deukmejian signed Assembly bill 3312 into law on September 12, 1988; it was then recorded by the Secretary of State on September 14, 1988 as Chapter 890 of the Statutes of 1988.  (See Exhibits #1e and #2)

The Senate Third Reading Analysis of Assembly Bill 3312 contained the following digest of the bill as it was last amended on June 6, 1988:

This bill would specify that in any action for dissolution of marriage under the Family Law Act, the court may sever and grant an early and separate trial on the issue of the dissolution of the status of the marriage, apart from other issues.  The bill would authorize the court to impose condition on the grant of the severance, as specified.  The bill would also require a judgment granting a dissolution of the status of the marriage to expressly reserve jurisdiction for later determination of all other pending issues.

(See Exhibit #7, page 1)