WeVote
Log In

Bill

Bill

SB 1283

An Act amending Title 42 (Judiciary and Judicial Procedure) of the Pennsylvania Consolidated Statutes, in rules of evidence, further providing for subpoena of records.

2025-2026 Regular Session Introduced by Lisa Baker and 8 co-sponsors

Pennsylvania SB 1283 would modify how records can be subpoenaed under Title 42, potentially changing service, responses, objections, and protections for sensitive information.

Referred to Judiciary
0
WeVote Research Nonpartisan
Bill Summary · SB 1283

Summary: SB 1283 (Session 2025-2026) – Pennsylvania

Purpose and Intent

SB 1283 proposes amendments to Title 42 (Judiciary and Judicial Procedure) of the Pennsylvania Consolidated Statutes, specifically within the rules of evidence concerning the subpoena of records. The bill aims to modify or clarify the process by which records can be compelled in legal proceedings via subpoena, potentially affecting how parties obtain documentary evidence in court, administrative hearings, or related legal actions.

Key Provisions (as indicated by the bill title and scope)

  • Subject Matter: Subpoena of records within the rules of evidence.
  • Jurisdiction: Pennsylvania.
  • Statutory Frame: Title 42 (Judiciary and Judicial Procedure), focusing on evidence rules.
  • Nature of Change: Amends existing statutory language to alter how records may be subpoenaed, which could include:
    • Procedures for serving subpoenas for records.
    • Requirements for responding to subpoenas (timelines, objections, preservation).
    • Protections or limitations surrounding the subpoena of certain records (e.g., confidential, privileged, or sensitive information).
    • Potential alignment with broader rules of evidence or civil/criminal procedural standards.
  • Authority for Implementation: The bill operates under the judiciary and legislative framework of Pennsylvania, and would become law if enacted and not vetoed.

Note: The text provided does not include the exact statutory language or detailed clause-by-clause changes. The above reflects typical areas such amendments address (service, response, privileges, timelines). For precise provisions, the full bill text is needed.

Who is Affected

  • Parties to Litigation and Proceedings: Individuals, businesses, government agencies, and organizations that rely on subpoenas to compel records as part of civil, criminal, or administrative proceedings.
  • Record Custodians: Entities that hold records subject to subpoenas (e.g., businesses, government offices, healthcare, financial institutions) may face changes in how subpoenas must be issued and how records must be disclosed.
  • Legal Practitioners: Attorneys and their clients, who must adhere to updated subpoena procedures and potential new objections, protections, or timelines.
  • Judiciary and Court Administrators: May need to revise internal processes, forms, and compliance mechanisms to reflect the amended rules of evidence.

Procedural and Timeline Considerations

  • Referral Status: As of 2026-04-17, SB 1283 has been referred to the Pennsylvania Senate Judiciary committee. This indicates the bill is in the early-to-middle stage of the legislative process and may undergo committee hearings, amendments, and approval before any floor vote.
  • Next Steps: If advanced by the Judiciary Committee, the bill would proceed to the full Senate for debate and vote, then potentially move to the House of Representatives (or reconciliation if Senate-only or bicameral passage is required). Final enactment would require signatures by the Governor.
  • Effective Date: The statute would specify an effective date (often upon enactment or a specified future date) for when the amended rules of evidence for subpoenas take effect. This detail would be in the full text.

Practical Implications

  • Possible clarification or tightening of subpoena powers for records, which could streamline access to documentary evidence or, conversely, introduce new protections or objections.
  • Businesses and institutions may need to review or revise record-retention and disclosure policies to ensure compliance with updated subpoena rules.
  • Individuals seeking to contest overly broad or improper subpoenas could gain clearer avenues for objections, privileges, or protective orders.

Sponsors

  • Co-sponsors include: Pat Stefano, Gene Yaw, Greg Rothman, Cris Dush, Dan Laughlin, Marty Flynn, Elder Vogel, Lisa Baker, and Tracy Pennycuick.

If you’d like, I can pull the full bill text or amendments to provide a clause-by-clause breakdown and cite any proposed changes to specific sections of Title 42.

Compiled from official sources — confirm details with the bill’s official record.

Sign in to ask a question.