California 2019-2020 Regular Session

California Assembly Bill AB2723

Introduced
2/20/20  
Introduced
2/20/20  
Refer
3/2/20  
Report Pass
5/4/20  
Refer
5/5/20  
Refer
5/5/20  
Report Pass
5/12/20  
Report Pass
5/12/20  
Engrossed
5/26/20  
Engrossed
5/26/20  
Refer
5/27/20  
Refer
6/23/20  
Refer
6/23/20  
Report Pass
8/19/20  
Report Pass
8/19/20  
Enrolled
8/30/20  
Enrolled
8/30/20  
Chaptered
9/29/20  
Passed
9/29/20  

Caption

Civil actions: entry of judgment: written stipulation.

Impact

With the approval and enactment of AB 2723, attorneys representing parties in civil suits are granted the ability to sign settlement agreements on behalf of their clients, broadening the capacity for efficient resolution without extensive courtroom procedures. However, this authority is balanced by a stipulation that attorneys must have express authorization from their clients to sign such documents, ensuring that clients retain control over their legal agreements. Furthermore, the bill includes provisions for potential disciplinary actions against attorneys who sign without proper authorization.

Summary

Assembly Bill No. 2723, introduced by Chiu, amends Section 664.6 of the Code of Civil Procedure in California, regarding the entry of judgment in civil actions stemming from written stipulations of settlement. The bill allows parties to pending litigation to enter into a settlement agreement outside the court's presence, provided that the agreement is documented in writing and signed by all parties involved. This modification aims to streamline the process of enacting settlements and providing courts with the authority to enter judgments accordingly.

Sentiment

The sentiment surrounding AB 2723 has been largely supportive, focusing on the bill's potential to reduce court congestion by facilitating quicker settlement resolutions. Advocates argue that making it easier to formalize settlements will lead to greater efficiency in the judicial process and encourage parties to resolve disputes amicably. However, some concerns have been voiced regarding the safeguards needed to protect clients from unauthorized commitments made by their counsel.

Contention

One notable point of contention lies in the bill's provisions that limit the ability of attorneys to bind their clients without express authorization, which aims to prevent the potential for malpractice or breaches of trust. Furthermore, the bill excludes certain cases from this stipulation process, such as civil harassment actions and matters governed by family law, reflecting ongoing concerns about maintaining appropriate legal protections for vulnerable parties in specific types of legal proceedings. Overall, the changes proposed in AB 2723 reflect a balance between enhancing procedural efficiency and preserving client rights.

Companion Bills

No companion bills found.

Similar Bills

CA AB889

Secrecy agreements.

CA AB2939

Healing arts: professional reports.

CA SB71

Political Reform Act of 1974: campaign expenditures: limitations.

CA AB35

Civil damages: medical malpractice.

NC S655

Update Structured Settlement Protection Act

NC H845

Update Structured Settlement Protection Act

CA AB2803

Campaign expenditures: criminal convictions: fees and costs.

CA SB487

Workers’ compensation.