BILL ANALYSIS
------------------------------------------------------------
|SENATE RULES COMMITTEE | SB 562|
|Office of Senate Floor Analyses | |
|1020 N Street, Suite 524 | |
|(916) 445-6614 Fax: (916) | |
|327-4478 | |
------------------------------------------------------------
CONSENT
Bill No: SB 562
Author: Morrow (R)
Amended: 4/16/01
Vote: 21
SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE : 7-0, 4/17/01
AYES: Escutia, Ackerman, Haynes, Kuehl, O'Connell, Peace,
Sher
SUBJECT : Civil procedure law: limited civil cases
SOURCE : California Law Revision Commission (CLRC)
DIGEST : This bill enacts various recommendations of the
California Law Revision Commission ("CLRC") to update the
codes to reflect the demise of the municipal courts in
California pursuant to the adoption of trial court
unification by all 58 California counties. In summary, the
bill:
1.Clarifies the authority of a court to appoint a receiver
in a pending limited or unlimited civil case.
2.Specifies that a petition to release a mechanics' lien
where the total amount of a lien is $25,000 or less, is a
limited civil case.
3.Specifies that where a petition to a court to relieve a
person from the prohibition against suing a public entity
relates to a claim under $25,000, the proceeding to
petition a court would also constitute a limited civil
CONTINUED
SB 562
Page
2
case.
4.Clarifies that the existence of a statute relating to the
court's authority in a limited civil case does not mean
that the same authority does or does not apply in an
unlimited case and that, similarly, the existence of a
statute relating to the court's authority in an unlimited
case does not imply the existence or absence of the same
authority in a limited civil case.
5.Amends various codes to remove the terms "docket" and
"docket entries" from various codes as an obsolete term,
and substitutes the term "register of actions" where
appropriate.
ANALYSIS : Existing law delineates the circumstances in
which a superior court may appoint a receiver in cases
"other than in a limited civil case." (Code of Civil
Procedure Section 564. Henceforth, all references are to
this code unless otherwise noted.) Existing law provides
for the appointment of a receiver in a limited civil case
"where necessary to preserve the property or rights of any
party to a limited civil case. (Code of Civil Procedure
Section 86(a)(8).)
This bill would consolidate the two provisions into Section
564 and permit the appointment of a receiver by the
superior court "in all other cases where necessary to
preserve the property or rights of any party."
Existing law provides that actions to enforce and foreclose
mechanics' liens are limited cases where the total amount
of the liens is $25,000 or less.
This bill would also classify, as a limited civil case, a
petition to release a mechanics' lien where the total
amount of a lien is $25,000 or less.
Existing law establishes the requisite conditions for an
action or proceeding to be treated as a limited civil case.
This bill would specify that the existence of a statute
relating to the authority of the court in a limited civil
case does not imply that the same authority does or does
SB 562
Page
3
not apply in an unlimited case. Correspondingly, it would
also provide that the existence of a statute relating to
the authority of the court in an unlimited case does not
imply the existence or absence of the same authority in a
limited civil case.
Existing law provides that upon a public entity's rejection
of a claim against it, the claimant may petition the court
to allow the person to file suit against the public entity.
This bill would specify that if the proposed claim would
fall within the jurisdiction of a limited civil case, the
proceeding to petition a court for relief to file the suit
would be a limited civil case.
This bill would also amend various codes to remove the
terms "docket" and "docket entries" from various codes as
an obsolete term, and substitute the term "register of
actions" where appropriate.
Background :
Under trial court unification, cases formerly handled by
municipal courts (e.g., cases with an amount in controversy
of under $25,000) are now handled as a "limited civil case"
in the superior courts. This bill is needed to update the
codes to reflect the changeover and to avoid any ambiguity
due to the transition.
According to the CLRC, trial court unification has created
an opportunity to simplify the practice and procedure of
appointing receivers "without a significant change in
substance, by consolidating the provisions." (Id., p.
298.)
Thus, CLRC is recommending that the statute on the
appointment of a receiver in an unlimited civil case be
broadened to apply to all cases (limited and unlimited
civil cases), while noting that application of the rule is
necessarily narrowed by the fact that certain cases in
which a receiver may be appointed may only be brought as an
unlimited case. CLRC is also recommending consolidation of
the current limited case provisions in Section 86(a)(8)
into Section 564 by permitting the appointment of a
SB 562
Page
4
receiver by the superior court "in all other cases where
necessary to preserve the property or rights of any party."
(Proposed Section 564(b)(9).)
The proposed language ("where necessary to preserve the
property or rights of any party") would replace language
currently authorizing the court to appoint a receiver
"where receivers have heretofore been appointed by the
usages of courts of equity."
CLRC asserts that this language change is not a significant
change and makes the law more readily understandable. In
support of its contention, CLRC cites cases holding that
the old language provided broad authority to appoint a
receiver, but only where other remedies were found to be
inadequate. (See Report, page 306.) Similarly, SB 562
would authorize the appointment of a receiver in other
cases only "where necessary to preserve the property or
rights of any party."
CLRC notes that the general language of subdivision (a)(9),
which starts with "in all other cases," would not override
the specific requirements for the appointment of a receiver
in specified situations enumerated elsewhere in the
statute.
Other provisions are technical
Developed by the CLRC, the other provisions of SB 562 would
adopt various technical revisions in the California codes
to reflect the recent adoption of trial court unification
in all 58 counties. Whereas the court system was formerly
divided into a municipal court and a superior court branch,
unification has brought both branches under the aegis of
the superior court. Cases that were formerly filed in the
municipal court may now be filed as a "limited civil case"
in the superior court.
These proposed changes are considered technical. For
example, trial courts no longer maintain a record
denominated as a "docket" in civil cases. Thus, that term
is being excised for various code provisions in favor of
the current reference - "registry" or "registry of
actions."
SB 562
Page
5
Two other provisions merely state specifically that certain
filings (petition to release mechanics' lien, petition for
relief from claims filing requirement of the Tort Claims
Act), are deemed to be limited civil case filings.
The fourth technical provision, adding Section 89 to the
Code of Civil Procedure, would state that the existence of
a statute specifying the authority of the court in a
limited civil case does not imply that the same authority
does or does not apply in an unlimited case. A similar
rule would also be established for statutes that only state
the court's authority in unlimited cases. This section is
intended as a "catch-all" to negate any implied limitation
on court authority in both limited and unlimited civil
cases.
FISCAL EFFECT : Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: No
Local: No
SUPPORT : (Verified 4/19/01)
California Law Revision Commission (source)
RJG:jk 4/18/01 Senate Floor Analyses
SUPPORT/OPPOSITION: SEE ABOVE
**** END ****