BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    






                             SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE
                           Senator Ellen M. Corbett, Chair
                              2009-2010 Regular Session


          AB 2485 (Feuer)
          As Amended June 21, 2010
          Hearing Date: June 29, 2010
          Fiscal: No
          Urgency: No
          TW:jd
                    

                                        SUBJECT
                                           
               Courts:  Civil Actions:  Design or Construction Defects

                                      DESCRIPTION  

          This bill would extend the sunset to July 1, 2017 for provisions  
          regulating actions filed in superior court by a common interest  
          development association against a builder, developer, or general  
          contractor for design or construction defects.

          This bill also would increase the court application fee for out  
          of state attorneys appearing in California superior courts from  
          $250 to $500.  This bill would designate $250 of these fees to  
          be deposited in the Trial Court Trust Fund.

                                      BACKGROUND  

          1.  Design or construction defect claims
           
          In 1995, pre-litigation dispute resolution processes and  
          procedures were established for design or construction defect  
          claims made by a common interest development (CID) association  
          against a builder, developer, or general contractor of a CID.   
          (SB 1029 (Calderon, Ch. 864, Stats. 1995); Civ. Code Sec. 1375.)  
           In 2001, procedures were established for superior court actions  
          regarding these claims.  (AB 1700 (Steinberg, Ch. 824, Stats.  
          2001); Civ. Code Sec. 1375.05.)  Civil Code Sections 1375 and  
          1375.05 were set to expire on July 1, 2010.  AB 927 (Calderon,  
          Ch. 7, Stats. 2009) extended the sunset to July 1, 2017 for  
          Civil Code Section 1375.  This bill would extend the sunset date  
          to July 1, 2017 for Civil Code Section 1375.05.

                                                                (more)



          AB 2485 (Feuer)
          Page 2 of ?



          2.  Pro hac vice application fees
           
          In 2008, the Legislature recognized a need to improve the  
          physical infrastructure of California courts because the courts  
          were in danger of losing their ability to safely and effectively  
          provide access to the courts and to carry out justice.  Under SB  
          1407 (Perata, Chapter 311, Statutes of 2008), various mechanisms  
          were created in order to generate money for the court system.   
          The Immediate and Critical Needs Account of the State Court  
          Facilities Construction Fund (Fund) was established to receive  
          the money generated.

          One of the mechanisms of generating money for the Fund was the  
          imposition of fees associated with pro hac vice applications.   
          The fee of $250 was to be charged to out of state attorneys  
          applying to represent parties in superior courts, 100 percent of  
          which would be deposited in the Fund.

          This bill seeks to generate additional revenue for trial courts  
          by increasing the fee charged in connection with pro hac vice  
          applications filed by out of state attorneys representing  
          parties in California courts.

                                CHANGES TO EXISTING LAW
           
          1.  Existing law  provides pre-litigation dispute resolution  
            processes and procedures for construction or design defects  
            claims made by a CID association against a builder, developer,  
            or general contractor of a CID.  (Civ. Code Sec. 1375.)

             Existing law  sunsets these provisions on July 1, 2017.  (Civ.  
            Code Sec. 1375(s).)

             Existing law  , until July 1, 2010, provides that, if parties to  
            a construction or design defect claim fail to resolve the  
            dispute, the CID association can file, as specified, an action  
            in the superior court against a builder, developer, or general  
            contractor.  (Civ. Code Sec. 1375.05.)

             This bill  would extend this sunset on Civil Code Section  
            1375.05 to July 1, 2017. 

          2.  Existing law  provides that out of state attorneys can appear  
            pro hac vice (without being licensed in California) in  
            California superior courts upon the satisfaction of specified  
            requirements.  (Rules of Ct. Sec. 9.40.)
                                                                      



          AB 2485 (Feuer)
          Page 3 of ?




             Existing law  provides that the fee payable to the State Bar  
            for filing a pro hac vice application is $50.  (Rules of Ct.  
            Sec. 940.) 
             
            Existing law  provides that the fee payable to the filing court  
            for filing a pro hac vice application is $250; the entirety of  
            this fee is deposited in the Immediate and Critical Needs  
            Account of the State Court Facilities Construction Fund.   
            (Gov. Code Sec. 70617(e).)
             
            Existing law  provides that funds collected in the Immediate  
            and Critical Needs Account of the State Court Facilities  
            Construction Fund are used for the planning, design,  
            construction, rehabilitation, renovation, replacement, or  
            acquisition of courts facilities, repayment loans made from  
            lease-revenue bonds for the purpose of leasing court  
            facilities, and payment of lease contracts for court  
            facilities.  (Gov. Code Sec. 70371.5.)
             
            Existing law  provides that funds collected in the Trial Court  
            Trust Fund are used to pay for trial court operations.  (Gov.  
            Code Sec. 68085.) 
             
            This bill  would increase the court application fee for an  
            application to appear pro hac vice in the superior court to  
            $500.
             
            This bill  would provide that $250 of the pro hac vice  
            application fee would be distributed into the Immediate and  
            Critical Needs Account of the State Court Facilities  
            Construction Fund, and $250 of this fee would be deposited  
            into the Trial Court Trust Fund.  

                                        COMMENT
           
          1.  Stated need for the bill  
          
          The author writes:
          
            This bill is designed to increase financial support for the  
            courts during a period of unprecedented cuts and threats of  
            further reductions to the court budget, while simultaneously  
            limiting the burden on the courts in civil matters so that  
            they can operate [as] productively and efficiently as  
            possible.
                                                                      



          AB 2485 (Feuer)
          Page 4 of ?




            This bill increases the fee paid by non-California lawyers who  
            seek the privilege of being temporarily admitted to practice  
            for the purpose of a particular case from $250.00 to $500.00,  
            with the funds going for the support of the courts.

            This bill also extends by 7 years the sunset on the  
            construction defect litigation rules so that they are  
            continued in effect until 2017, identically to the comparable  
            sunset period for the related pre-litigation dispute  
            resolution procedure.

          Co-sponsor California Defense Counsel argues in favor of the  
          bill as follows:  "AB 2485 makes a narrow change to the  
          Government Code to increase fees charged for pro hac vice  
          appearances (appearances by out-of-state counsel) from $250 to  
          $500.  This Government Code fee is statutorily directed to the  
          court's critical needs account, so important in these days of  
          shortages in court funding.  We are advised that pro hac vice  
          fees in many states have been increased in recent years.  It is  
          not unreasonable that lawyers in other states, offered the  
          privilege of temporarily practicing law in California pursuant  
          to their out-of-state licenses, help defray expenses in our  
          courts.  Should consensus items be identified, AB 2485 might be  
          an appropriate vehicle to make changes; of course, in that case,  
          the Committee will be asked to re-evaluate the bill if it  
          changes.  AB 2485 is a small piece of an absolutely critical  
          discussion of court funding."

          Co-Sponsor Consumer Attorneys of California (CAOC) write:   
          "Beyond its existing language, this bill is also intended as a  
          vehicle for discussions on additional ways to increase  
          efficiencies in the civil courts.  We have been involved in  
          discussions with the bench and bar on how civil courts can be  
          run in the most effective way possible, saving time and costs  
          for all involved.  We hope that as this bill moves through the  
          process it can be amended to add civil efficiency measures that  
          reflect best practices from around the state.  At a time when  
          the courts are struggling with horrendous budget cuts and  
          struggling to provide the most basic level of services, it is  
          crucial to make sure that they operate at maximum efficiency."

          2.  Extending sunset for superior court actions brought by CID  
             associations  

          This bill would extend the sunset to July 1, 2017 for provisions  
                                                                      



          AB 2485 (Feuer)
          Page 5 of ?



          regulating an action filed in superior court by a CID  
          association against a builder, developer, or general contractor  
          for design or construction defects provided under Civil Code  
          Section 1375.05.  The sunset provision under this bill is the  
          same as that enacted by AB 927 (Calderon, Ch. 7, Stats. 2009),  
          which extended the sunset to July 1, 2017 for Civil Code Section  
          1375, the companion section to Civil Code Section 1375.05.  AB  
          927 inadvertently failed to include Civil Code Section 1375.05.   
          Given that Civil Code Section 1375 appears to be working  
          properly pursuant to the passage of AB 927, it is appropriate to  
          extend the sunset of Civil Code Section 1375.05 to July 1, 2017.

          3.  Pro hac vice application fees  

          This bill would increase the court application fee for out of  
          state attorneys appearing in California superior courts from  
          $250 to $500, and would designate $250 of these fees to be  
          deposited in the Trial Court Trust Fund.  CAOC argues that the  
          fee increase proposed by this bill would generate over a half  
          million dollars in additional funds for the courts annually.

          Under existing law, $250 of the pro hac vice application fee  
          goes to the Immediate and Critical Needs Account of the State  
          Court Facilities Construction Fund, which is used to pay for  
          various court facility needs.  The Trial Court Trust Fund is  
          used for trial court operations.  The increased fee proposed by  
          this bill would help alleviate the financial needs of trial  
          courts. 


           Support  :  None Known

           Opposition  :  None Known

                                        HISTORY
           
           Source  :  California Defense Counsel; Consumer Attorneys of  
          California

           Related Pending Legislation  :  None Known

           Prior Legislation  :  See Background.

           Prior Vote  :

          Assembly Judiciary Committee (Ayes 7, Noes 3)
                                                                      



          AB 2485 (Feuer)
          Page 6 of ?



          Assembly Appropriations Committee (Ayes 11, Noes 5)
          Assembly Floor (Ayes 44, Noes 27) 

                                   **************