BILL ANALYSIS
SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE
Martha M. Escutia, Chair
2003-2004 Regular Session
AB 3081 A
Author: Assembly Member Corbett B
As Introduced
Hearing Date: June 1, 2004 3
Code of Civil Procedure 0
KH 8
1
SUBJECT
Civil Discovery
DESCRIPTION
This bill would reorganize the statutes governing civil
discovery into short sections closely tracking the existing
language and sequencing.
BACKGROUND
In 2003, the Legislature directed the California Law
Revision Commission (CLRC) to study discovery in civil
cases. [ACR 123 (Wayne), Stats. 2002, Res. Ch. 166.]
CLRC issued its Recommendation in September 2003,
recommending no substantive changes, only a reorganization
of the statutes governing civil discovery into short
sections closely tracking the existing language and
sequencing.
This bill results from the CLRC Recommendation.
CHANGES TO EXISTING LAW
Existing law specifies the manner and methods of discovery
in civil actions and cases. [Civil Discovery Act of 1986,
Code Civ. Proc. Sec. 2016 et seq.]
This bill would effect a non-substantive reorganization of
the Sections to make the statutes more user-friendly and
(more)
AB 3081 (Assembly Committee on Judiciary)
Page 2
facilitating amendment and sound development of the law.
COMMENT
1.Stated need for the bill
In its Recommendation, the CLRC states that the statutes
governing civil discovery are logically organized but are
difficult to use due to their length and complexity. For
example, Code of Civil Procedure Section 2025 currently
consists of 22 subdivisions, 705 paragraphs, and 8,148
words.
CLRC states the "reorganization will enhance readability
for courts and practitioners, and assist them in
interpreting and following the law. Breaking the law
into shorter, more comprehensible segments will enable a
person to readily locate pertinent provisions by using a
table of contents . . . ."
CLRC states that reorganization will have other benefits,
too:
(1) It will simplify the legislative process for
amending the statute in the future. Under existing
law, a bill to amend a provision of the discovery
statute is lengthy even if it proposes only a minor
revision. This makes the legislative process more
burdensome than it would be if the bill were short.
(2) It will lead to better legislation, because it
facilitates insertion of new statutory material.
(3) It will conform the discovery statute to modern
drafting techniques adopted by the California Code
Commission, the Legislature, the Legislative
Counsel, and the Law Revision Commission.
CLRC describes the methodology of the proposed reform as
follows:
To minimize disruption to courts and practitioners,
the proposed legislation would closely track existing
AB 3081 (Assembly Committee on Judiciary)
Page 3
law. The existing article on civil discovery in the
Code of Civil Procedure would be recast as a title.
In general, each section of the existing article would
become a chapter, with its subdivisions becoming
individual sections grouped, in some cases, as
articles.
Each chapter would retain the same base number as the
section from which it derived. For example, the
substance of existing Section 2028 (deposition by
written questions) would be divided into Sections
2028.010-2028.080, which would be grouped into a
chapter entitled "Deposition By Written Questions."
The proposed legislation would generally use the same
wording as in the existing provisions. Some revisions
would be made to eliminate redundancies. Other
revisions would be made to improve grammar or clarity,
correct mistakes, conform cross-references, and comply
with current drafting conventions.
A Comment to each new section would state the
derivation of the provision, and a Disposition Table
would show the disposition of each section being
repealed. These would be published along with the
statutory text, to assist persons using the new law.
Cross-references in other statutes to the discovery
provisions would be conformed to the new numbering
scheme.
The Commission has taken care to ensure that the
proposed revisions are strictly nonsubstantive. The
intent of the proposal is not to alter existing rights
and duties relating to civil discovery. Rather, the
reform would preserve existing procedures, but make
the law more clear and accessible, and promote sound
development of the law in the future.
Support: None Known
Opposition: None Known
HISTORY
Source: California Law Revision Commission
AB 3081 (Assembly Committee on Judiciary)
Page 4
Related Pending Legislation: AB 3078 (Assembly Judiciary
Committee) (would amend two sections
of the Civil Discovery Act and would
require double-jointing language to
be sure substantive amendments of AB
3078 are captured in the renumbered
sections of AB 3081)
AB 1143 (Simitian); AB 1249 (Pacheco); AB 1912 (Richman);
AB 2084 (Montanez); AB 2109 (Chu); AB
2202 (Pacheco); AB 2211 (Plescia); AB
2584 (Chu & Levine); AB 2870
(Mullin); AB 3078 (Assembly Committee
on Judiciary); AB 3079 (Assembly
Committee on Judiciary); AB 4X 15
(Vargas); SB 1067 (Speier); SB 1465
(Kuehl); SB 1571 (Alpert); SB 1747
(Ackerman); SB 1876 (Alpert); SB 4X 2
(Speier) (the substance of these
bills does not conflict with AB 3081,
but contain cross-references to
various code sections; a clean-up
bill may be required next session in
the event some cross-references are
not accurately reflected)
Prior Legislation: None Known
Prior Vote: Assembly Judiciary Committee 11-0 (consent);
Assembly Floor 71-0 (consent)
**************