BILL ANALYSIS
AB 712
Page 1
Date of Hearing: April 21, 2009
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON JUDICIARY
Mike Feuer, Chair
AB 712 (Evans) - As Amended: April 13, 2009
Proposed Consent
SUBJECT : SMALL CLAIMS COURT: JURISDICTION
KEY ISSUE : SHOULD THE LAW BE CLARIFIED TO PROVIDE THAT SMALL
CLAIMS COURT DOES INDEED HAVE THE POWER TO AWARD EQUITABLE
RELIEF WHEN EXISTING STATUTES ALREADY GIVE THE SMALL CLAIMS
COURT THAT POWER?
FISCAL EFFECT : As currently in print this bill is keyed
non-fiscal.
SYNOPSIS
This non-controversial bill simply clarifies that when an
existing statute provides the small claims court with
jurisdiction to grant equitable relief, such a remedy is indeed
within the jurisdiction of the small claims court. Even when a
statute expressly provides the small claim court with the
authority to order equitable relief, some small claims judges
have been unsure whether they have the ability to grant
equitable relief because the small claims court jurisdictional
statute is not completely clear. This bill clarifies that
small claims court has jurisdiction to grant equitable relief
in these very limited situations. Supporters include the
Judicial Council and Consumer Attorneys of California. There
is no known opposition.
SUMMARY : Clarifies that small claims courts have jurisdiction
to order equitable relief when another statute expressly so
authorizes. Specifically, this bill :
1)Clarifies that the jurisdiction of the small claims court
includes an action for an injunction or other equitable
relief only when a statute expressly authorizes a small
claims court to award such relief.
2)Provides that nothing in this act is intended to expand or
encourage the expansion of the jurisdiction of small claims
AB 712
Page 2
court.
EXISTING LAW :
1)Establishes small claims court in order to resolve minor
civil disputes expeditiously, inexpensively, and fairly.
(Code of Civil Procedure Section 116.110 et seq. All further
statutory references are to that code unless otherwise
stated.)
2)Provides that the monetary jurisdiction for natural persons
in small claims court for a single claim is $7,500. The
jurisdictional limit for all other entities, except as
specified, is $5,000. Provides that in any small claims
action seeking money damages, the court may grant equitable
relief in the form of recision, restitution, reformation and
specific performance, in lieu of, or in addition to, money
damages. (Sections 116.210-116.221.)
3)Provides that a member of a common interest development
association may bring an action for declaratory or equitable
relief for failure to comply with laws regarding elections
and meetings of the association. Provides for a civil
penalty of up to $500 for each violation. Provides that
certain of these actions may be brought in small claims court
if the amount of the demand does not exceed the small claims
court jurisdictional limits. (Civil Code Section 1363.09.)
4)Provides that a common interest development association must
make specified records available to its members to inspect
and copy. Provides that a member may bring an action to
enforce this right. Provides for a civil penalty of up to
$500 for each violation. Provides that an action to enforce
this right may be brought in small claims court if the amount
of the demand does not exceed the small claims court
jurisdictional limits. (Civil Code Section 1365.2.)
COMMENTS : This non-controversial bill clarifies that when
statutes have independently provided small claims court with
authority to grant equitable relief, the small claims court
does indeed have that authority. According to the author:
"This bill would provide a necessary fix to ensure consistency
and clarity between the Small Claims Act and statutes
independently authorizing the small claims court to provide
injunctive or equitable relief."
AB 712
Page 3
Several statutes give the small claims court jurisdiction to
provide equitable relief, but the Small Claims Act does not
cross-reference those sections . Several sections affecting
common interest development associations explicitly provide the
small claims court with jurisdiction to grant equitable relief
in particular cases. However, the general small claims court
jurisdictional statute does not cross-reference those
provisions or provide the small claims court with the general
ability to award equitable relief. As a result, there has been
some confusion about the small claims court's jurisdiction.
This bill clarifies that small claims courts have jurisdiction
to order injunctive or other equitable relief when another
statute expressly authorizes the small claims court to award
such relief.
It is important to note that this bill does not provide small
claims court with jurisdiction unless a statute outside of the
Small Claims Act expressly provides that the small claims court
- and not simply a court of competent jurisdiction - has such
authority. In order to ensure that this bill is simply
clarifying existing law and is not, in any way, expanding the
jurisdiction of small claims court, this bill provides, by its
own terms that it is not intended to expand or encourage the
expansion of the jurisdiction of small claims court.
ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT : The Judicial Council writes that it
support the bill "because it will help clarify the jurisdiction
of the small claims court and avoid improper dismissals of
cases where statutes other than the Small Claims Act have
specifically authorized actions for injunctive or other forms
of equitable relief to be brought in that court."
REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION :
Support
American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees
(AFSCME)
California Rural Legal Assistance Foundation
Consumer Attorneys of California
Judicial Council
Opposition
AB 712
Page 4
None on file
Analysis Prepared by : Leora Gershenzon / JUD. / (916)
319-2334