BILL ANALYSIS �
SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE
Senator Noreen Evans, Chair
2013-2014 Regular Session
SB 315 (Lieu)
As Amended April 30, 2013
Hearing Date: May 7, 2013
Fiscal: No
Urgency: No
RD
SUBJECT
Civil Actions: Telephonic Appearances
DESCRIPTION
Existing law provides a list of hearings, conferences and
proceedings for which a party may generally make a telephonic
appearance, subject to court discretion.
This bill would replace the list of hearings, conferences, and
proceedings at which a party may appear by telephonic appearance
with a general rule that, subject to court discretion, a party
who has provided notice may appear by telephone at any
conference, hearing, or proceeding, except a trial or trial
readiness conference.
BACKGROUND
In 2007, AB 500 (Lieu, Ch. 268, Stats. 2007) sought to address
the lack of uniformity in courts' practices in allowing
attorneys to appear by telephone at various conferences and
hearings, and a strong concern of both plaintiffs' and defense
bars that disparate court practices result in attorneys being
required to attend court hearings and conferences in person when
a telephonic appearance would have been sufficient. Those
stakeholders noted that requiring personal appearances in such
cases was inefficient, expensive, and burdensome. As a result,
that bill was enacted to expand upon the types of proceedings at
which telephonic appearances could be made by parties.
In doing so, AB 500 also codified the Legislature's intent to
promote uniformity in the procedures and practices relating to
(more)
SB 315 (Lieu)
Page 2 of ?
telephone appearances in civil cases, and the intent to
encourage courts to permit parties to appear by telephone at
appropriate conferences, hearings, and proceedings in civil
cases in order to improve access to the courts and reduce
litigation costs. (See Code Civ. Proc. Sec. 367.5(a).)
This bill would permit a party to generally appear by telephone,
except in a trial or trial readiness conference, or as otherwise
ordered by the court, as specified.
CHANGES TO EXISTING LAW
Existing Rule of Court defines "general civil case" to mean all
civil cases except probate, guardianship, conservatorship,
juvenile, and family law proceedings (including proceedings
under divisions 6-9 of the Family Code, Uniform Parentage Act,
Domestic Violence Prevention Act, and Uniform Interstate Family
Support Act; freedom from parental custody and control
proceedings; and adoption proceedings), small claims
proceedings, unlawful detainer proceedings, and "other civil
petitions" described as specified. (California Rules of Court,
Rule 1.6(4).)
Existing law provides that in all general civil cases, as
specified, a party that has provided notice may appear by
telephone at the following conferences, hearings, and
proceedings:
a case management conference, provided the party has made a
good faith effort to meet and confer before the conference as
required by law and has timely served and filed a case
management statement;
a trial setting conference;
a hearing on law and motion, except motions in limine;
a hearing on a discovery motion;
a conference to review the status of an arbitration or
mediation;
a hearing to review the dismissal of an action; and
any other hearing, conference, or proceeding if the court
determines that a telephone appearance is appropriate. (Code
Civ. Proc. Sec. 367.5(b).)
Existing law permits the court to require a party to appear in
person at a hearing, conference, or proceeding listed above if
the court determines on a hearing-by-hearing basis that a
personal appearance would materially assist in the determination
SB 315 (Lieu)
Page 3 of ?
of the proceedings or in the effective management or resolution
of the particular case. (Code Civ. Proc. Sec. 367.5(c).)
This bill would replace the list of conferences, hearings, and
proceedings for which a party may currently appear by telephone
to instead provide that in all general civil cases, as defined
in the California Rules of Court, a party that has provided
notice may appear by telephone at any conference, hearing, or
proceeding, except a trial or trial readiness conference. This
bill would not modify the ability for a court to require a party
to appear on a hearing-to-hearing basis under existing law.
This bill would make other conforming changes.
COMMENT
1. Stated need for the bill
According to the author:
The use of telephonic appearances has existed in California
since 1987 - Cal[.] Gov[.] Code [Sec.] 68070.1 (repealed by
Chapter 268). [ . . . ] The existing law is wide[ly] used with
much success. SB 315 builds upon the existing provisions
relating to telephonic appearances and further liberalizes
their usage. It permits a party in a general civil case that
has provided notice, to appear by telephone at certain
hearings and proceedings.
Specifically, this bill proscribes that any conference,
hearing, or proceeding is eligible for telephonic appearances
except for a trial or trial readiness conference. Current law
specifies the types of conferences, hearings, and proceedings
- for example: trial setting conference and hearing on a
discovery motion.
Furthermore, this bill also retains judicial discretion by
permitting a court to require a party to appear in person at
these hearings or proceedings if the court determines that a
personal appearance would materially assist in the
determination of the proceedings or in the effective
management or resolution of the case.
SB 315 (Lieu)
Page 4 of ?
2. This bill would preserve court discretion while limiting
unnecessary personal appearances by attorneys and reducing
costs of litigation
While existing law already provides for specified hearings,
conferences, and proceedings at which parties are permitted to
make telephonic appearances, the proponents of this bill believe
that further expansion of telephonic appearances is appropriate.
Accordingly, the bill would permit a party to generally appear
by telephone, except in a trial or trial readiness conference,
or as otherwise ordered by the court, as specified.
The sponsor of this bill, the Consumer Attorneys of California
(CAOC), argues that post AB 500, "[w]hile many courts
efficiently use this modern technology, some have been hesitant
to taking full advantage of telephonic appearances. There are
many kinds of appearances, some of which that may take three
minutes or less and don't actually require the physical presence
of the attorney. These types of appearances could and should be
handled by phone in order to cut down on travel time and
valuable court and lawyer time. Expanding the usage of
telephonic appearances will also allow parties to avoid spending
hours on the freeway. For people with small law firm practices
in particular, these court appearances are costly and could be
handled through existing technology that is both cost-effective
and dependable."
When AB 500 was first passed to provide statutory authority for
telephonic appearances in certain hearings, conferences and
proceedings, subject to court discretion, this Committee's
analysis commented that "[f]or sole practitioners or non-profit
organizations that do not pass the cost of travel time onto
their clients, the inability to make a telephonic appearance can
be especially burdensome, and can put a strain on already
limited resources. The costs of litigation will be
significantly reduced by allowing attorneys to make telephonic
appearances for these types of conferences and hearings." In
light of the ability of telephonic appearances to improve access
to justice, it does not appear unreasonable to alter the
statutory rule to generally authorize telephone appearances as
long as the courts retain judicial discretion to require
personal appearances on a hearing-by-hearing basis.
It should be noted that this bill would apply to "general civil
cases" as defined by the California Rules of Court. Those rules
define "general civil case" to mean all civil cases except
SB 315 (Lieu)
Page 5 of ?
probate, guardianship, conservatorship, juvenile, and family law
proceedings, small claims proceedings, unlawful detainer
proceedings, and "other civil petitions" as specified.
(California Rules of Court, Rule 1.6(4).) Arguably, there are
special considerations in such cases that would generally
justify personal appearances.
3. Judicial Council working group
Judicial Council has a current working group that has recently
released for public comment proposed amendments to existing
California Rules of Court on the issue of telephonic
appearances. Those comments are due by June 18, 2013. (See
Judicial Council Invitation to Comment, Civil Practice and
Procedure: Telephonic Appearances (SPR 13-14)
[as of May 2,
2013].) While the Judicial Council does not yet have a position
on this bill, they are continuing to work with the sponsor and
other stakeholders on this issue.
Support : None Known
Opposition : None Known
HISTORY
Source : Consumer Attorneys of California
Related Pending Legislation : None Known
Prior Legislation :
AB 1582 (Wagner, 2012), among other things, would have added to
the list of conferences, hearings, and proceedings for which
telephonic appearances are permitted.
AB 500 (Lieu, Ch. 268, Stats. 2007), See Background and Comment
2.
**************