logout

Store Research

Civil discovery; unlawful detainer; subpoenas.

AB 1126, c. 113

Some bill research does not include the Governor's file because at the time we researched the bill, the sitting Governor had not released his chaptered bill file. If the Governor's file is not included with this particular research, please contact our office (1-530-666-1917 or quote@legintent.com) and we will be happy to provide this file at no charge if it is available. Please Note: Governor files did not exist prior to 1943.

AB 1126, c. 113: Civil discovery; unlawful detainer; subpoenas. 1) Makes several clarifying and technical changes regarding unlawful detainer and discovery motions; 2) Requires the Judicial Council to adopt Rules of Court prescribing--in any forcible entry, forcible detainer or unlawful detainer action--the time for filing and serving opposition and reply papers relating to a motion to quash, a summary judgment motion or a discovery motion in a summary proceeding for possession of real property.

The sponsor of this bill was the California Law Revision Commission.

Under existing law, a landlord may bring an unlawful detainer case to recover possession of real property when a tenant wrongfully refuses to leave. (Code of Civil Procedure Section 1161, et seq.) The procedure for an unlawful detainer case is prescribed by statute with the underlying goal to promote peaceful and expeditious resolution of landlord-tenant disputes. (Code of Civil lProcedure Section 1179a.) In order to promote expeditious resolution of these cases, the Civil Discovery Act provided for special time limits and notice periods that are shorter than the time allotted for performance of the same act in other types of civil cases. In most of these provisions, the language specifying the special time for an unlawful detainer case is mixed with language specifying the time limit for other types of cases, which creates procedural ambiguities.

In October, 2006 the California Law Revision Commission (Law Revision Commission) issued a report recommending that these ambiguities be eliminated by amending each provision to separately state the special time limits for an unlawful detainer case. The Law Revision Commission's report also recommended amendments that would apply the same discovery procedures to all summary proceedings for possession of real property, including a shortened five-day notice requirement for discovery motions. Finally, the report recommended amending provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure that fail to specify how to treat a request for the employment records of an employee. This bill is being sponsored by the Law Revision Commission for these specific purposes.

If you would like to order the legislative history of this bill [click here] .