Judicial Council Adopts Emergency COVID-19 Rules on Civil Deadlines, Bail
The emergency regulations temporarily restrict eviction proceedings, set a reduced bail schedule, encourage remote appearances for hearings and toll deadlines in civil matters.
April 06, 2020 at 06:41 PM
4 minute read
California's Judicial Council on Monday enacted nearly a dozen hastily crafted rule changes designed to keep as many people as possible out of courthouses while maintaining basic judicial operations as the number of confirmed coronavirus cases in the state surpassed 15,000.
The emergency regulations temporarily restrict eviction proceedings, set a reduced bail schedule, encourage remote appearances for hearings and toll deadlines in civil matters. The changes stem from a March 27 executive order signed by Gov. Gavin Newsom freeing judicial branch leaders from restrictions on setting statewide trial court rules addressing COVID-19.
"Jurists and lawyers have struggled and continue to struggle to balance the health and safety needs of their local communities with the civil and constitutional rights and liberties of individuals and groups," Chief Justice Tani Cantil-Sakauye told an emergency meeting of the Judicial Council.
"Today as part of our ongoing collective efforts to flatten the curve, stem the spread of the virus and assume the responsibility delegated to us by governor Newsom … we seek to address the issues of the faces behind the cases and those that support them seeking relief, resolving disputes or having their voice heard by the court," Cantil-Sakauye said.
The rule changes include:
>> Suspending summons and entries of default in landlord-tenant disputes. New rules will also freeze all actions on judicial foreclosures on mortgages and deeds of trust. The action dovetails with an executive order issued by the governor last month barring the eviction of tenants who cannot pay rent due to pandemic-related reasons. Before Monday's action by the Judicial Council, some courts had halted unlawful detainer matters while others continued to process them.
>> Allowing courts to conduct proceedings through video feed or other remote technology—with the consent of defendants. That caveat drew opposition from some judges and sheriffs who did not want to give defendants the choice of whether to physically appear in court.
Appellate Justice Marsha Slough, chair of the Judicial Council's executive and planning committee, said she had talked with many critics of that language but was unpersuaded to strike the defendant's consent.
"Having the right to do it and being the right thing to do are different things," Slough said. "We are not at the point in time to do away with the rights of a defendant because it would be more expedient."
>> Setting a statewide emergency bail schedule. Cantil-Sakauye had previously recommended that courts reduce bail levels to keep as many defendants as possible out of local jails. This statewide mandate will set bail at $0 for most misdemeanor and lower-level felony offenses.
>> Tolling the statute of limitations for all civil causes of action. Sought by the Consumer Attorneys of California and other groups, the rule will stop the clock on civil matters filed between April 6 and the date 90 days after Newsom lifts the state of emergency related to COVID-19.
The emergency rule also extends the timelines for bringing civil matters to trial by six months.
The Judicial Council's approval of the rules follows its endorsement last month of emergency procedures aimed mostly at criminal proceedings, including delaying the deadlines for arraigning defendants and holding preliminary hearings.
Read more:
Bar Is Pressed to Grant Diploma Privilege to Law Grads Amid Virus Crisis
Pay Cuts, Layoffs, and More: How Law Firms Are Managing the Pandemic
Gig-Worker Classification in the Age of COVID-19
Zoom GC Aparna Bawa Opens Up About Big Gains and Some Growing Pains
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
Trending Stories
- 1'I'm Staying Everything': Texas Bankruptcy Judge Halts Talc Trials Against J&J
- 2What We Know About the Kentucky Judge Killed in His Chambers
- 3Judge Blasts Authors' Lawyers in Key AI Suit, Says Case Doomed Without Upgraded Team
- 4Federal Judge Won't Stop Title IX Investigation Into Former GMU Law Professor
- 5Ex-Prosecutor and Judge Fatally Shot During Attempted Arrest on Federal Corruption Charges
Who Got The Work
Charles A. Weiss of Holland & Knight has entered an appearance for Rafael Badalov in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed July 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Lee Law on behalf of Otter Products LLC, accuses the defendant of selling counterfeit phone cases and accessories bearing the plaintiff's 'OtterBox' trademark. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nina R. Morrison, is 1:24-cv-05214, Otter Products, LLC v. Badalov et al.
Who Got The Work
Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher partners Benjamin Hershkowitz, Richard W. Mark and Casey J. McCracken and R. Scott Johnson, Thomas M. Patton and Cara S. Donels have entered appearances for Berkshire Hathaway Energy Co. and MidAmerican Energy Co., respectively, in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The case, filed July 17 in Iowa Southern District Court by Nyemaster Goode PC and Caldwell Cassady & Curry on behalf of Midwest Energy Emissions Corp., asserts six patents related to sorbents for the oxidation and removal of mercury. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Stephen H. Locher, is 4:24-cv-00243, Midwest Energy Emissions Corp. v. Berkshire Hathaway Energy Company et al.
Who Got The Work
Michael J. Hickey and Michael L. Jente of Lewis Rice LLC have stepped in to represent Tidal Wave Management in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The case, filed July 18 in Missouri Western District Court by Husch Blackwell on behalf of Waterway Gas & Wash Co., accuses the defendant of using a mark that's confusingly similar to the plaintiff's 'Clean Car Club' mark. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Fernando J. Gaitan Jr., is 4:24-cv-00471, Waterway Gas & Wash Company v. Tidal Wave Management LLC.
Who Got The Work
Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen & Katz partners Lauren M. Kofke and William Savitt have stepped in to represent CVS Health and and its top officials in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The complaint, filed Aug. 30 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Chaya Sara Kaufmann, accuses the defendants of failing to disclose that they used misleading forecasts to set premium plans which overstated the profitability of the company's health care benefits segment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Margaret M. Garnett, is 1:24-cv-06595, Kaufmann v. Lynch et al.
Who Got The Work
Robert L. Wallan from Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman has entered an appearance for Findlay Management Group in a pending complaint for declaratory judgment. The complaint, filed on Aug. 8 in Nevada District Court by Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani and Skarzynski Marick & Black on behalf of Houston Casualty Co., seeks to declare that no insurance policy exists between Houston Casualty and Findlay due to there not being an adequate form of delivery and claims that if delivery was substantiated it is rescinded based on material omissions and misrepresentations. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Gloria M. Navarro, is 2:24-cv-01459, Houston Casualty Company v. Findlay Management Group.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250