BILL ANALYSIS Ó
AB 555
Page 1
Date of Hearing: April 7, 2015
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON JUDICIARY
Mark Stone, Chair
AB 555
(Alejo) - As Introduced February 23, 2015
PROPOSED CONSENT
SUBJECT: CIVIL ACTIONS: EXPEDITED JURY TRIALS
KEY ISSUE: IN ORDER TO ALLOW FOR THE CONTINUATION OF EXPEDITED
JURY TRIALS IN CIVIL COURTS, SHOULD THE SUNSET PROVISION OF THE
ACT BE REPEALED?
SYNOPSIS
This non-controversial bill seeks to repeal the sunset date of
the Expedited Jury Trials Act, to allow for the continuation of
its provisions indefinitely. An Expedited Jury Trial (EJT) is a
court trial where the parties sign a consent order and stipulate
that EJT procedures apply. EJT procedures include smaller
juries (eight or less jurors), fewer peremptory challenges for
each side (a limit of three, except upon court approval of one
additional challenge) and a limited time no more than three
hours) for each side to present its case. All parties waive
their right to appeal, move for a directed verdict, or make any
post-trial motions. Thus, the verdict in an EJT is binding. To
date, the EJT program has not been used as much as originally
AB 555
Page 2
anticipated. Since its inception in January 2010, only 156 jury
trials have been conducted under the EJT program, representing
4.3% of the total number of civil jury trials that took place
during that period. An informal working group which supports
removal of the sunset provision has come together to discuss
improvements to this trial option so that the EJT program will
continue and the manner in which EJTs are conducted can be
improved. There is no reported opposition to this bill.
SUMMARY: Extends the provisions of the Expedited Jury Trials
Act indefinitely. Specifically, this bill repeals the January
1, 2016 sunset date of the Expedited Jury Trials Act.
EXISTING LAW:
1)Provides, until January 1, 2016, the Expedited Jury Trial Act.
(AB 2284 (Evans) Chap.674, Stats. 2010, Section 2; Code of
Civil Procedure Sections 630.01 et seq. All further statutory
references are to the Code of Civil Procedure, unless
otherwise noted.)
2)Requires that any agreement to participate in an expedited
jury trial in a civil matter may be entered into only after a
dispute has arisen and an action has been filed. (Section
630.03.)
3)Requires all parties to agree to participate in an expedited
jury trial and, if represented, their counsel must sign a
proposed consent order granting an expedited jury trial.
(Section 630.03.)
4)Provides that an agreement to participate in an expedited jury
trial is binding on all parties unless one of the following
occurs: a) all parties stipulate to end the agreement to
participate in the expedited jury trial; or b) the court, on
AB 555
Page 3
its own motion or at the request of a party by noticed motion,
finds that good cause exists for the action not to proceed as
an expedited jury trial. (Section 630.03.)
5)Provides that, except as specifically authorized in the Act,
the implementing rules, or in a consent order authorized
therein, the applicable statutes and rules governing civil
actions apply. (Section 630.03.)
6)Requires a court to approve the use of an expedited jury trial
and any "high/low" agreements or other stipulations in cases
involving either a self-represented litigant; or a minor, an
incompetent person, or a person for whom a conservator has
been appointed. (Section 630.03.)
7)Requires that parties agreeing to an expedited jury trial
submit a carefully specified proposed consent order to the
court, and the court to issue the consent order as proposed by
the parties, unless the court finds good cause why the action
should not proceed through the expedited jury trial process,
in which case the court shall deny the proposed consent order
in its entirety. (Section 630.03.)
8)Allows the parties to exercise only 3 peremptory challenges
and to request one additional peremptory challenge each, which
is to be granted by the court as the interests of justice may
require, and prescribes that a jury may deliberate as long as
needed. (Section 630.04.)
9)Provides that the rules of evidence apply in expedited jury
trials, unless the parties stipulate otherwise. (Section
630.06.)
AB 555
Page 4
10)Provides for the right to issue subpoenas and notices to
appear to secure the attendance of witnesses or the production
of documents at trial, per existing law. (Section 630.06.)
11)Provides that the verdict, in an expedited jury trial case is
binding, subject to any written high/low agreement or other
stipulations concerning the amount of the award agreed upon by
the parties. (Section 630.07.)
12)Greatly limits the ability of the parties to obtain
post-verdict relief such as directed verdicts, motions to set
aside the verdict, or motions for a new trial. (Section
630.08.)
13)Requires the Judicial Council, on or before January 1, 2011,
to adopt rules and forms to establish uniform procedures
implementing the provisions for expedited jury trials,
including, but not limited to, rules for all of the following:
a) Additional content of proposed consent orders;
b) Pretrial exchanges and submissions;
c) Pretrial conferences;
d) Time limits for jury selection;
e) Time limits for trial, including presentation of
evidence and argument;
f) Presentation of evidence and testimony; and
g) Any other procedures necessary to implement the
provisions of the Act.
AB 555
Page 5
(Section 630.11.)
14)Defines various purposes of and terms used in the Act.
(Sections 630.01-630.11.)
FISCAL EFFECT: As currently in print this bill is keyed
non-fiscal.
COMMENTS: The author explains the reason for the bill as
follows:
The expedited jury trial (EJT) option was executed in 2011
to help courts deal with overloaded dockets that were the
result of major budget cuts and courtroom closures. EJTs
are ideal for cases involving smaller dollar amounts that
do not involve catastrophic injuries, cases that often
affect lower-income workers. These cases are prone to
being lost in the system and leaving vulnerable
Californians without compensation. The EJT statute is set
to sunset January 1, 2016.
Effectiveness of the Expedited Jury Trial Program in
Streamlining Trial Court Congestion: The goal of the EJT in
California has been to promote the speedy and economical
resolution of civil cases in order to conserve judicial
resources. Participation has been completely voluntary. The
applicable rules of procedure have been designed to be flexible
and a reduced jury size is employed in the trials. The trials
are completed in approximately one day. However, since its
January 1, 2011 inception date, this new trial option has not
been used as frequently as originally anticipated.
According to an informational report submitted to the Judicial
Council on January 30, 2015, 39 of the 58 counties reported data
on the use (or non-use) of EJTs in their superior courts from
AB 555
Page 6
January 1, 2011 to August 31, 2014. Of those 39 counties, 25
reported that no EJTs had been conducted during the reporting
period. The 14 remaining counties reported that one or more
EJTs were conducted during the reporting period. A compilation
of the figures from those 14 counties shows that a total of 156
EJTs were conducted during the entire reporting period. For
individual courts, the percentage of EJTs ranged from 2% to 9%
of the jury trials conducted during the reporting period.
A Need for Adjustments to the Act's Existing Provisions by
Practitioners: Taking into consideration the small percentage
of jury trials which have been conducted pursuant to the EJT
program, an informal working group has been formed to discuss
how the program could become more attractive to parties and more
beneficial to the overburdened court system. The working group
consists of many of the same stakeholders who urged enactment of
the Expedited Jury Trials Act in 2011. They are dedicated to
seeing greater utilization of this trial option. It is very
likely that once the group has reached a consensus on the type
of adjustments which are needed to make these expedited trials
more widespread, it will present its suggestions to the
Legislature for further consideration. The members of the
working group have agreed to keep the Committee informed of its
deliberations and suggestions for amending this bill. The
author has agreed to bring the measure back to this Committee
for further hearing, if necessary, to allow for review of any
amendments.
By removing the sunset date on the EJT program, those expedited
trials will remain an option to serve those whose cases do not
involve catastrophic injuries or present major time-consuming
issues to be resolved, but are significant to the parties
involved and worth litigating in a court of law.
ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT: According to the sponsor, the Consumer
Attorneys of California, the EJT format provides resolution of
AB 555
Page 7
cases while saving time, expense and court resources.
Previous Related Legislation: AB 2284 (Evans), Chapter 674,
Statutes 2010 established the Expedited Jury Trials Act.
REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION:
Support
Consumer Attorneys of California (sponsor)
California Association of Joint Powers Authorities
California Chamber of Commerce
Opposition
None on file
Analysis Prepared by:Khadijah Hargett / JUD. / (916) 319-2334
AB 555
Page 8