BILL ANALYSIS Ó
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|SENATE RULES COMMITTEE | SB 470|
|Office of Senate Floor Analyses | |
|(916) 651-1520 Fax: (916) | |
|327-4478 | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
CONSENT
Bill No: SB 470
Author: Jackson (D)
Amended: 4/22/15
Vote: 21
SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE: 6-0, 4/14/15
AYES: Jackson, Vidak, Anderson, Leno, Monning, Wieckowski
NO VOTE RECORDED: Hertzberg
SUBJECT: Civil actions: summary judgment
SOURCE: California Judges Association
Judicial Council of California
DIGEST: This bill provides that a court, in ruling on a motion
for summary judgment, need rule only on those objections to
evidence that it deems material to its disposition of the motion
and provides that any and all objections not ruled upon are
deemed overruled and preserved on appeal.
ANALYSIS:
Existing law:
1)Authorizes any party, pursuant to a specified procedure, to
move for summary judgment in any action or proceeding if it is
contended that the action has no merit or that there is no
defense to it and to move for summary adjudication as to
certain issues in the action or proceeding.
SB 470
Page 2
2)Requires the court to grant a motion for summary judgment if
all the papers submitted show that there is no triable issue
as to any material fact and that the moving party is entitled
to a judgment as a matter of law.
3)Requires the court to consider all of the evidence set forth
in the papers, except evidence to which objections have been
made and sustained by the court, in determining whether the
papers show that there is no triable issue as to any material
fact.
4)Requires that the summary judgment motion be supported by
affidavits, declarations, admissions, answers to
interrogatories, depositions, and matters of which judicial
notice shall or may be taken, and that the supporting papers
include a separate statement setting forth plainly and
concisely all material facts which that the moving party
contends are undisputed, as specified.
5)Provides that evidentiary objections not made at the hearing
shall be deemed waived.
6)Holds, in the case of Reid v. Google, Inc. (2010) 50 Cal.4th
512, 534, that if a trial court fails to rule expressly on
specific evidentiary objections, it is presumed that the
objections have been overruled, the trial court considered the
evidence in ruling on the merits of the summary judgment
motion, and the objections are preserved on appeal.
This bill:
1)Adds a provision to the existing summary judgment statute to
specify that the court need rule only on those objections to
evidence that it deems material to its disposition of the
motion for summary judgment.
SB 470
Page 3
2)Specifies that any and all objections not ruled on are deemed
overruled and preserved on appeal.
Background
After the filing of a lawsuit, either party to an action may
move for summary judgment by contending that the action has no
merit or that there is no defense thereto. Essentially, the
party filing the motion is claiming that all necessary factual
issues are resolved and need not be tried by the court because
they are so one-sided. A motion for summary judgment must be
supported or opposed by admissible evidence such as affidavits,
declarations, admissions, answers to interrogatories,
depositions, and requests for judicial notice, as appropriate.
In determining whether the papers show that there is no triable
issue as to any material fact, the court must consider all of
the evidence set forth in the papers, except evidence to which
objections have been made and sustained by the court. If the
court finds that there is no triable issue as to any material
fact and that the moving party is entitled to a judgment as a
matter of law, then the motion must be granted (which generally
disposes of the whole case). If an issue of fact is presented
the court must permit trial thereof, though it may also find
that certain other issues "are without substantial controversy"
and grant summary adjudication as to those issues. (See Code
Civ. Proc. Sec. 437c.) In short, the purpose of the summary
procedure is to provide a method for prompt disposition of
actions in which there is no triable, material issue of fact on
which evidence shall be taken.
This bill is the product of a proposal recommended by the
Judicial Council's Policy Coordination and Liaison Committee,
Civil and Small Claims Committee and Appellate Advisory
Committee, to reduce the burdens on trial courts associated with
evidentiary objections in summary judgment proceedings.
According to those advisory committees' October 29, 2014 report
to the Judicial Council, advisory committee members (including
SB 470
Page 4
both judges and attorneys) report that time and resources
expended in ruling on objections to evidence offered in support
of or in opposition to summary judgment motions are substantial.
(See Report to the Judicial Council, Judicial Council-Sponsored
Legislation: Evidentiary Objections in Summary Judgment
Proceedings (Oct. 29, 2014) (hereinafter, "Report")
Page 5
Summary judgment motions have become one of the most
time-consuming pre-trial matters that civil courts handle, as
parties on both sides flood the courts with evidentiary
objections. SB 470 is a carefully balanced, court efficiency
proposal that would not only save judges significant amounts
of time and resources when considering huge volumes of summary
judgment motion papers, but would also avoid any harm to the
litigants by preserving their rights on appeal with respect to
any properly raised objections that are not expressly ruled
upon by the court. . . . In turn, by reducing the burdens on
trial courts associated with evidentiary objections in summary
judgment proceedings, this proposal will allow the trial
courts to handle other motions and proceedings more swiftly.
FISCAL EFFECT: Appropriation: No Fiscal
Com.:NoLocal: No
SUPPORT: (Verified4/21/15)
California Judges Association (co-source)
Judicial Council of California (co-source)
California Chamber of Commerce
OPPOSITION: (Verified4/21/15)
None received
ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT: Judicial Council of California and the
California Judges Association, co-sponsors of this bill, write
that "[j]udges may spend hours ruling on evidentiary objections
for a single summary judgment motion. Frequently, the number of
objections that pertain to evidence on which a court relies in
determining whether a triable issue of fact exists is a small
subset of the total number of objections made by the parties."
Accordingly, "[t]o reduce the burden on trial courts in ruling
SB 470
Page 6
on numerous objections to evidence in summary judgment
proceedings, Code of Civil Procedure [S]ection 437c would be
amended by providing that a court need rule only on those
objections to evidence that it deems material to its disposition
of the summary judgment motion, and that objections not ruled on
are deemed overruled and preserved on appeal."
Prepared by:Ronak Daylami / JUD. / (916) 651-4113
4/22/15 16:20:34
**** END ****