Introduced
by
To ban lawsuits against an entertainment forum based on false imprisonment, wrongful ejection, unlawful arrest, assault, battery, libel, or slander, etc., if the entertainment forum had probable cause to believe and did believe that the individual violated the terms for admission. This does not apply if unreasonable force was used against the individual.
Referred to the Committee on Local, Urban, and State Affairs
Substitute offered
To replace the previous version of the bill with a version which somewhat narrows the definition of "nuisances" for which a person could be ejected.
The substitute passed by voice vote
Amendment offered
by
To tie-bar the bill to Senate Bills 420 and 425, which impose training requirements and standards for security guards.
The amendment failed 13 to 22 (details)
Amendment offered
by
To require security guards at entertainment forums or shopping centers to receive the same standard of training as police officers.
The amendment failed by voice vote
Passed in the Senate 23 to 13 (details)
To ban lawsuits against an entertainment forum based on false imprisonment, wrongful ejection, unlawful arrest, assault, battery, libel, or slander, etc., if the entertainment forum had probable cause to believe and did believe that the individual violated the terms for admission. This does not apply if excessive force was used against the individual.
Substitute offered
To replace the previous version of the bill with one which excludes shopping malls from the immunity conferred by the bill, and does excludes immunity in cases of "unreasonable" force, rather than "excessive" force.
The substitute passed by voice vote
Amendment offered
by
To add casinos to the venues covered by the liability exemptions proposed by the bill.
The amendment passed by voice vote
Passed in the House 59 to 20 (details)
To ban lawsuits against an entertainment forum (but not a shopping mall) based on false imprisonment, wrongful ejection, unlawful arrest, assault, battery, libel, or slander, etc., if the entertainment forum had probable cause to believe and did believe that the individual violated the terms for admission. This does not apply if unreasonable force was used against the individual.
Failed in the Senate 13 to 21 (details)
To concur with a House-passed version of the bill. The vote sends the bill to a House-Senate conference committee to work out the differences.
Received
Passed in the Senate 20 to 12 (details)
To replace the previous version of the bill with a House-Senate compromise which uses the term “excessive force” with regards to casinos, and “unreasonable force” with regards to the other entertainment forums covered by the bill, for purposes of providing an exception to the immunity conferred by the bill.
