Bill
Bill > HB134
summary
Introduced
01/14/2026
01/14/2026
In Committee
01/14/2026
01/14/2026
Crossed Over
Passed
Dead
Introduced Session
2026 Regular Session
Bill Summary
Establishing a rebuttable presumption relating to the best interest of an alleged incapacitated or protected person in an action under the Act; authorizing a certain person to petition a certain court for reasonable visitation with a certain alleged incapacitated or protected person; authorizing the court to impose certain restrictions on a certain visitation; establishing a certain immunity from civil liability under certain circumstances; etc.
AI Summary
This bill establishes a legal framework for individuals to petition for visitation with an "alleged incapacitated or protected person," meaning someone the petitioner wishes to visit who may be unable to make decisions for themselves. The bill presumes it is in the best interest of such individuals to have visitation from close family members like spouses, adult children, grandchildren, parents, and siblings, as well as other "interested parties" who are defined as individuals appointed as guardians, agents under advance directives, surrogate decision-makers, or attorneys-in-fact under a durable power of attorney. A person can file a petition with the court if their visitation has been unreasonably interfered with or denied, provided the authorized decision-maker is not a public guardian. The petition must detail the petitioner's relationship, the interference, and who is responsible, and the petitioner must agree to court-ordered evaluations. The bill outlines who must be served with the petition, including the protected person, their attorney, guardian, decision-maker, physician, and facility administrators. If the protected person objects to visitation, the burden shifts to the petitioner to prove the objection wasn't based on reliable evidence, and the presumption of best interest can be overcome by evidence of abuse, the protected person's wishes, a decision-maker's recommendation, or harm to the protected person. Courts will issue findings of fact and law and can impose reasonable restrictions on visitation, including monitoring at the petitioner's expense, and can assess costs and attorney's fees for bad faith petitions or unjustified interference, though not against the protected person. Health care providers are immune from liability if they deny or restrict visitation based on a court order or a good-faith belief it's not in the protected person's best interest. Finally, authorized decision-makers must provide contact information for the protected person's location, funeral arrangements, or burial site within 72 hours of a written request.
Committee Categories
Justice
Sponsors (1)
Last Action
House Judiciary Hearing (13:00:00 2/5/2026 ) (on 02/05/2026)
bill text
bill summary
Loading...
bill summary
Loading...
bill summary
| Document Type | Source Location |
|---|---|
| State Bill Page | https://mgaleg.maryland.gov/mgawebsite/Legislation/Details/HB0134?ys=2026RS |
| BillText | https://mgaleg.maryland.gov/2026RS/bills/hb/hb0134f.pdf |
Loading...