BILL ANALYSIS
AB 2284
Page 1
Date of Hearing: March 23, 2010
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON JUDICIARY
Mike Feuer, Chair
AB 2284 (Evans) - As Introduced: February 18, 2010
PROPOSED CONSENT
SUBJECT : VOLUNTARY EXPEDITED JURY TRIALS
KEY ISSUE : SHOULD CALIFORNIA ESTABLISH, THROUGH THE
SPEARHEADING OF THE JUDICIAL COUNCIL, A VOLUNTARY ALTERNATIVE
PROCESS FOR HANDLING CIVIL ACTIONS THAT WILL CONTINUE TO PROVIDE
PARTIES WITH THEIR DAY IN COURT, OFFER POTENTIALLY SUBSTANTIAL
COST SAVINGS TO THE PARTIES, REDUCE THE BACKLOG OF CIVIL CASES,
AND MORE EFFICIENTLY MANAGE JURY RESOURCES AT A TIME WHEN OUR
TRIAL COURTS ARE ESPECIALLY STRESSED?
FISCAL EFFECT : As currently in print this bill is keyed fiscal.
SYNOPSIS
As the author notes, the rising costs of litigation presents an
ongoing challenge in providing access to justice for a number of
litigants, especially those with claims involving relatively
small amounts in dispute. Traditional trials can be time
consuming and expensive for both litigants and the courts.
Moreover, for many litigants, alternative dispute resolution has
not proven successful in resolving the cases prior to trial. AB
2284, the byproduct of continuing working groups discussions
sponsored by the Judicial Council, ultimately seeks to authorize
the Judicial Council to adopt rules of court, along with the
Legislature enacting any needed statutory changes, for a
voluntary alternative, streamlined method of handling civil
actions that still allows parties to get their day in court. In
its introductory form, the bill merely authorizes the Judicial
Council to adopt rules of court to establish procedures for
conducting expedited jury trials in civil cases where the
parties stipulate that those rules and procedures shall apply,
including provision for a jury of fewer than 12 members.
SUMMARY : Seeks to provide, through a Judicial Council
spearheaded collaborative effort, a streamlined method of
handling civil actions that still allows parties to get their
day in court. Specifically, this bill, in its introductory form
AB 2284
Page 2
only, authorizes the Judicial Council to adopt rules of court to
establish procedures for conducting expedited jury trials in
civil cases where the parties stipulate that those rules and
procedures shall apply, including provision for a jury of fewer
than 12 members.
EXISTING LAW establishes the right to a trial by jury, and
provides that a jury may be waived in a civil case only pursuant
to specified manners. A jury trial consists of 12 persons,
except that in civil actions and cases of misdemeanor, it may
consist of 12 or any number less than 12, upon which the parties
may agree. It further provides for the review of a judgment or
order in a civil action or proceeding by appeal, and requires
the Judicial Council to prescribe rules for the practice and
procedure on appeal consistent with state law.
COMMENTS : This bill seeks to become a vehicle that ultimately
reflects a broad and unusual consensus of key court users
supporting a new voluntary and innovative process to streamline
the handling and resolution of some civil actions. In its
opening incarnation, however, the bill merely authorizes the
Judicial Council to adopt rules of court to establish procedures
for conducting expedited jury trials in civil cases where the
parties stipulate that those rules and procedures shall apply,
including provision for a jury of fewer than 12 members.
In support of the measure moving forward as such a hoped-for
vehicle, the author states:
The rising costs of litigation presents an ongoing
challenge in providing access to justice for a number
of litigants, especially those with claims involving
relatively small amounts in dispute. Traditional
trials can be time consuming and expensive for both
litigants and the courts. Moreover, for many
litigants, alternative dispute resolution has not
proven successful in resolving the cases prior to
trial. AB 2284 will ultimately seek to authorize the
Judicial Council, consistent with its existing
rulemaking authority, to adopt rules of court, along
with making any needed statutory changes, for a
voluntary alternative, streamlined method of handling
civil actions that still allows parties to get their
day in court.
AB 2284
Page 3
This consensus effort is a potentially path-breaking development
in the state's civil justice system at a time when court
resources are at the breaking point in so many jurisdictions.
This fact was pithily noted in recent media coverage by veteran
Capitol reporter Cheryl Miller, who wrote recently in the
Recorder that:
Trial lawyers, the defense bar and their respective
allies don't usually agree on much. But a collegial
bunch of these courtroom adversaries have found common
ground in draft rules designed to speed up some civil
trials in California? A working group convened by the
Judicial Council is cobbling together the final
details of a so-called expedited jury trial system.
Based on a successful South Carolina model, the idea
is to identify relatively simple lawsuits, iron out
evidentiary and witness issues before trial and leave
the big issues for a smaller jury to decide over a day
or two? Proponents say the voluntary system would cut
litigation costs for plaintiffs, defendants and
insurance carriers?("Faster Jury Trials May Get Their
Day," Cheryl Miller, Recorder, March 17, 2010.)
The South Carolina Model : According to the author's office, in
the late 1990s, the plaintiff and defense bars in Charleston
County, South Carolina, developed the model after which this
measure is patterned, which is an especially attractive
possibility for smaller civil cases. The bars in that state
came together and established a voluntary, inexpensive,
accessible, and binding "summary jury trial" program. It uses a
reduced jury size, flexibility including relaxed rules of
evidence, and often involves high/low agreements on the scope of
damages. The Charleston County model has gained acclaim for its
enhancing access to courts, reducing costs for litigants, and
increasing court efficiency. The model continues to have
support from the plaintiff and defense bars, as well as the
court, insurers, and businesses.
Using the Charleston County model as an overlay, the Judicial
Council's Small Civil Cases Working Group has reportedly
developed a streamlined method to make the administration and
resolution of civil cases more effective and efficient. This
bill would authorize, consistent with its existing authority,
the Judicial Council to adopt rules of court providing for
expedited jury trials in California.
AB 2284
Page 4
The goal of the expedited jury trial in California is to promote
the speedy and economical resolution of cases and conserve
judicial resources. Like the Charleston County model,
participation would be completely voluntary, the applicable
rules of procedure would be flexible, and a reduced jury size
would be employed. The goal would be to complete a trial in
approximately one day. Based on the South Carolina experience,
as well as other jurisdictions that have used summary jury
trials, it is expected that the courts, and litigants, will see
significant cost savings, as well as a reduction in backlogs of
civil cases, and more efficiently managed jury resources.
Likely Need For One Or More Legislative Authorizations for This
Innovative Approach, And Planned Return Of This Measure For
Further Committee Consideration Once It Is Further Fleshed Out :
While it appears clear that many of the provisions of this
legislation may ultimately be crafted and enacted by Judicial
rules of court, it is also apparent that there likely will be a
need for various legislative authorizations for this innovative
addition to the civil justice toolkit. The author therefore
appropriately acknowledges that there will ultimately likely be
the need for legislative authorization in some appropriate form
once the four corners of the measure are further fleshed out, at
which time she has agreed to bring the measure back to this
Committee for further hearing and review of the ultimate
consensus product, including any such additional legislative
authorizations.
ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT : Apropos of the broad consensus support
for this measure at this time are the comments submitted to the
Committee by the Consumer Attorneys of California, which
included that:
This measure grants the Judicial Council the power to
establish a voluntary system of streamlined jury
trials modeled after a highly successful system in
South Carolina. This bill has rallied a coalition of
stakeholders in the civil jury trial system to support
much needed relief from the current backlog. The
growing backlog of civil cases on court dockets across
the state represents a glaring example of the adage
"Justice delayed is justice denied."
REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION :
AB 2284
Page 5
Support
California Defense Counsel (co-sponsor)
Consumer Attorneys of California (co-sponsor)
Opposition
None on file
Analysis Prepared by : Drew Liebert / JUD. / (916) 319-2334