WeVote
Log In

Bill

Bill

HB 49

District Attorneys - As enacted, expands the proceedings for which a district attorney general pro tem may be appointed to include certain civil proceedings; declares meetings of the district attorneys general conference to be open meetings except for meetings related to certain matters; specifies that the executive director of the district attorneys general conference must provide legal counsel and advice to district attorneys general and their staff and that the legal counsel and advice may be provided by attorneys employed with the district attorneys general conference. - Amends TCA Title 8, Chapter 7, Part 1 and Title 8, Chapter 7, Part 3.

114th Regular Session (2025-2026) Introduced by Elaine Davis

The bill clarifies that adults are not liable for their parents’ debts, while preserving criminal support duties for indigent parents.

Comp. became Pub. Ch. 312
#districtattorneys
0
WeVote Research Nonpartisan
Bill Summary · HB 49

Summary — HB 49: Filial Debt Fairness Act

Main purpose

To clarify North Carolina’s filial responsibility statute (G.S. 14‑326.1) by expressly stating that the statute does not make an adult child legally liable for debts incurred by a parent. The bill preserves the criminal duty to support indigent or infirm parents but disclaims any obligation to assume parental debts.

Key provisions

  • Amends G.S. 14‑326.1 to add a new subsection (c), reading:
    • “Nothing in this section shall be construed as requiring a person to be liable or otherwise responsible for a debt contracted for or otherwise incurred by the person's parent or parents.”
  • Leaves existing text in place:
    • Duty and criminal penalties for failure to support a parent who is sick or unable to work and lacks means to support themselves (Class 2 misdemeanor for a first offense; Class 1 misdemeanor for second or subsequent offenses).
    • Rule that, where multiple persons share responsibility, they shall “share equitably” in that duty.

Who or what is affected

  • Adult children and other persons who could be charged under the filial support statute: the bill clarifies that while they may have a criminal duty to support indigent parents in certain circumstances, they are not civilly or contractually responsible for debts the parent incurred.
  • Creditors and health-care or long‑term‑care providers: the clarification limits the use of filial responsibility law as a basis to collect parental debts from children.
  • Courts, prosecutors, and defense counsel: will apply the clarified statutory construction when litigating or charging under the filial support statute.

Procedural / timeline information

  • Statute amended: G.S. 14‑326.1.
  • Effective date: “This act is effective when it becomes law” (no delayed effective date specified).
  • Recorded legislative action (sample): bill read on first reading Feb 5, 2025; procedural steps listed in bill file. (If you need the most current committee/status entry, consult the legislature’s official docket.)

Practical effect and considerations

  • Provides legal clarity: reduces uncertainty about whether filial‑responsibility law could be interpreted to create civil liability for a parent’s preexisting debts (e.g., medical bills, loans).
  • Does not eliminate the criminal duty to support a parent who is sick/unable to work and lacks means—individuals can still face misdemeanor charges for neglecting that statutory support duty.
  • Implementation: courts and collection actors will rely on the express construction when evaluating claims that adult children owe parents’ incurred debts.

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

Sign in to ask a question.