BILL ANALYSIS
------------------------------------------------------------
|SENATE RULES COMMITTEE | AB 1742|
|Office of Senate Floor Analyses | |
|1020 N Street, Suite 524 | |
|(916) 445-6614 Fax: (916) | |
|327-4478 | |
------------------------------------------------------------
THIRD READING
Bill No: AB 1742
Author: Assembly Judiciary Committee
Amended: 9/2/05 in Senate
Vote: 21
SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE : 7-0, 7/12/05
AYES: Dunn, Morrow, Ackerman, Cedillo, Escutia, Figueroa,
Kuehl
SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE : 13-0, 8/25/05
AYES: Migden, Aanestad, Alarcon, Alquist, Ashburn, Battin,
Dutton, Escutia, Florez, Murray, Ortiz, Poochigian,
Romero
ASSEMBLY FLOOR : 71-0, 5/27/05 - See last page for vote
SUBJECT : Courts: civil fees: procedure: court
operations
SOURCE : Conference of Delegates of California Bar
Associations
County of San Mateo
Judicial Council of California
DIGEST : This bill makes a number of changes to statutes
that govern civil procedure and court operations.
Specifically, it modifies the terms of the Tort Claims Act
(Act) to provide that certain claims against judicial
branch entities must be filed under the restraints of the
Act, and that judicial branch entities must be treated
CONTINUED
AB 1742
Page
2
similarly to the state under the terms of the Act. This
bill also (1) makes a number of streamlining changes to
small claims court procedure, (2) deletes the sunset for a
statute that permits imposition of sanctions on frivolous
lawsuit filers, (3) extends the scope of family law orders
that may be made before a court considers a motion to
transfer, (4) requires specified settlement acceptances to
be made in writing, (5) permits court personnel to access
Department of Motor Vehicles' electronic car insurance
information systems, (6) provides that regular warrants
include paper warrants and judicial orders entered into
automated warrant systems, (7) provides that subpoenas may
be served in gated communities in the same manner as other
service of process, and (8) makes other technical,
non-substantive changes. This bill establishes that all of
these changes are prospective only.
Senate Floor Amendments of 9/2/05 modify amendments taken
in the Senate Judiciary Committee and clarify that Section
11135 of the Government code applies to the California
State University.
ANALYSIS : This is the Assembly Judiciary Committee's
civil omnibus and court operations bill. The bulk of its
provisions are sponsored by the Judicial Council of
California, but one provision is sponsored by the County of
San Mateo and other provisions are sponsored by the
Conference of Delegates of California Bar Associations.
Existing law, the Tort Claims Act, establishes that a claim
for money or damages against the state or a local public
entity must be presented in accordance with the terms of
the Act. [Section 905 and 905.2 of the Government Code]
Existing law requires the board to provide forms specifying
the information that must be contained in a Tort Claims Act
claim against the state. [Section 910.4 of the Government
Code]
Existing law specifies that a claim against a local public
entity need not be presented in accordance with the Act if
the claim is made by the state or another local public
entity. [Section 905(i) of the Government Code]
AB 1742
Page
3
This bill states that all claims against a judicial branch
entity for money or damages "based upon an express contract
or for an injury for which the judicial branch entity is
liable" must be presented in accordance with the Act. It
states that this is declaratory of existing law.
This bill requires the board to provide forms specifying
the information that must be contained in a claim against a
judicial branch entity.
This bill specifies that a judicial branch entity's claim
for money or damages against a local public entity need not
be presented in accordance with the Act.
Existing law requires Judicial Council to use county
counsel, the Attorney General, or other counsel to
represent or defend judges, subordinate judicial officers,
and court executive officers of the municipal and superior
courts that are sued under the Act. The law provides that
a prior defense shall not be the sole basis for judicial
disqualification of any of the listed parties. [Section
811.9 of the Government Code]
This bill extends the disqualification provision by
providing that an ongoing defense shall not be the sole
basis for disqualification.
This bill also makes nonsubstantive changes to include
references to justices and the Administrative Office of the
Courts, and to delete references to municipal courts.
Existing law provides that a small claims case must be
scheduled for hearing between 15 and 40 days from the date
of a court order directing the parties to appear, if all
defendants reside in the county where the action is filed.
But a case with at least one defendant residing out of the
county must be scheduled between 30 and 70 days from the
date of the order. When a public entity files more than 10
claims at one time, and at least one defendant resides out
of the county, the date for appearance may not be more than
90 days from the date of the order. [Section 116.330 of
the Code of Civil Procedure (CCP)]
This bill provides that all small claims cases, regardless
AB 1742
Page
4
of the defendant's county of residence, must be scheduled
for hearing between 20 to 70 days from the date of the
court order directing the parties to appear.
Existing law requires a defendant to be served with a small
claims court claim and the court order directing his or her
appearance at least 15 days before a hearing date if the
defendant resides in the county, and 20 days prior if the
defendant resides outside the county. [Section 116.340 of
the CCP]
This bill requires proof of service of that claim to be
filed with the court at least five days before the hearing.
Existing law permits a small claims court to correct a
clerical error in a judgment or set aside and vacate a
judgment because of an incorrect or erroneous legal basis
for the decision. [Section 116.725 of the CCP]
This bill establishes that a party to the case may only
bring one motion to correct such errors, and must do so
within 30 days after the clerk mails notice of entry of
judgment. The bill will not limit a small claims court
from correcting errors on its own motion at any time.
Existing law specifies a distribution scheme relative to
fees collected associated with small claims hearings.
This bill provides that $2 of every $75 fee to be
distributed to the law library fund in the county in which
the court is located.
Existing law requires a superior court that hears a small
claims court appeal to wait 10 days after completion of the
appeal process before transferring the action back to the
small claims court for enforcement or other proceedings.
[Section 116.780 of the CCP]
This bill deletes that 10-day waiting period.
Existing law provides that a court may impose sanctions and
punitive damages on an attorney, law firm, or party who
presents a paper to the court: (1) that is presented
primarily for an improper purpose, (2) that contains
AB 1742
Page
5
claims, defenses, or other legal contentions unsupported by
either existing law or a non-frivolous extension of
existing law, (3) that contains allegations or factual
contentions that do not have evidentiary support and are
not likely to have evidentiary support after a reasonable
opportunity for discovery, or (4) that contains denials of
factual contentions that are not supported by evidence or
reasonable information and belief. This statute is set to
sunset on January 1, 2006. [Section 128.7 of the CCP]
This bill deletes the sunset provision.
Existing law permits the court in a proceeding for
dissolution of marriage or legal separation to make all
necessary and proper orders in connection with motions for
allowance of temporary spousal support, support of
children, counsel fees and costs before deciding a motion
to transfer. [Section 396b of the CCP]
This bill applies the above permissions to Uniform
Parentage Act proceedings. The bill also extends the list
of orders that may be decided prior to hearing a motion to
transfer, adding motions to determine custody and
visitation of children.
Existing law permits any party to serve a written offer
upon any other party to a trial or arbitration to settle a
claim. [Section 998 of the CCP]
This bill requires the written offer to include a provision
that allows the accepting party to indicate acceptance of
the offer by signing a statement that the offer is
accepted.
This bill also requires that any acceptance of the offer be
in writing and signed by counsel for the accepting party,
or by the accepting party if not represented by counsel.
Existing law requires all drivers and owners of motor
vehicles to carry "evidence of financial responsibility,"
including insurance cards or certificates of
self-insurance, in their vehicles at all times. The law
permits law enforcement personnel to obtain evidence of
financial responsibility from an electronic reporting
AB 1742
Page
6
system, when available. [Section 16020 of the Vehicle
Code]
Existing law requires the Department of Motor Vehicles
(DMV) to develop a method by which law enforcement officers
may electronically verify that an insurance policy or bond
for a motor vehicle has been issued. [Section 16058.1 of
the Vehicle Code]
This bill provides that the DMV electronic reporting
systems for the insurance policies will be available to
court personnel.
Existing law requires workers' compensation administrative
law judges to subscribe to the Code of Judicial Ethics
adopted by the Supreme Court pursuant to subdivision (m) of
Section 18 of Article VI of the California Constitution for
the conduct of judges, and not engage in conduct contrary
to that code or to the commentary to the Code of Judicial
Ethics made by the California Judges Association. [Section
123.6 of the Labor Code]
This bill makes a technical amendment to remove the
reference to the California Judges Association.
Existing law provides that a peace officer who makes an
arrest pursuant to an arrest warrant that is regular upon
its face may not be held liable for an arrest if he/she
acts without malice and in the reasonable belief that the
person arrested is the person referred to in the warrant.
[Section 43.55 of the Civil Code]
This bill states that a warrant that is regular upon its
face may include a paper arrest warrant or a judicial order
entered into an automated warrant system by law enforcement
or authorized court personnel.
This bill is double-jointed with AB 1459 (Canciamilla) and
SB 422 (Simitian).
Existing law allows certain people access to gated
communities for the purpose of performing a lawful service
of process when the community is staffed by a guard or
other security personnel. [Section 415.21 of the CCP]
AB 1742
Page
7
This bill extends the statute to include lawful service of
a subpoena.
Existing law, Section 11135 of the Government Code,
provides that no person in the State of California shall
deny full and equal access based on race, national origin,
ethnic group identification, religion, age, sex, color, or
disability.
This bill provides that, notwithstanding Section 11000, the
above provision and section applies to the California State
University.
FISCAL EFFECT : Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: Yes
Local: No
SUPPORT : (Verified 9/2/05)
Conference of Delegates of California Bar Associations
(co-source)
County of San Mateo (co-source)
Judicial Council of California (co-source)
California Judges Association
Minorities in Law Enforcement
ASSEMBLY FLOOR :
AYES: Aghazarian, Arambula, Baca, Bass, Benoit, Berg,
Bermudez, Blakeslee, Bogh, Calderon, Canciamilla, Chan,
Chavez, Chu, Cogdill, Coto, Daucher, De La Torre, DeVore,
Dymally, Emmerson, Evans, Frommer, Garcia, Goldberg,
Harman, Jerome Horton, Shirley Horton, Houston, Huff,
Jones, Keene, Klehs, Koretz, La Malfa, Laird, Leno,
Leslie, Levine, Lieber, Liu, Matthews, Maze, McCarthy,
Montanez, Mountjoy, Mullin, Nakanishi, Nation, Nava,
Negrete McLeod, Niello, Parra, Pavley, Plescia, Richman,
Sharon Runner, Ruskin, Saldana, Salinas, Spitzer,
Strickland, Torrico, Tran, Umberg, Villines, Walters,
Wolk, Wyland, Yee, Nunez
NO VOTE RECORDED: Cohn, Gordon, Hancock, Haynes, Karnette,
La Suer, Oropeza, Ridley-Thomas, Vargas
AB 1742
Page
8
RJG:mel 9/2/05 Senate Floor Analyses
SUPPORT/OPPOSITION: SEE ABOVE
**** END ****