California 2023-2024 Regular Session

California Senate Bill SB71

Introduced
1/9/23  
Refer
1/18/23  
Introduced
1/9/23  
Introduced
1/9/23  
Refer
1/18/23  
Refer
1/18/23  
Report Pass
4/12/23  
Report Pass
4/12/23  
Refer
4/12/23  
Refer
4/17/23  
Refer
4/17/23  
Refer
4/17/23  
Refer
4/20/23  
Report Pass
5/18/23  
Refer
4/20/23  
Refer
4/20/23  
Engrossed
5/24/23  
Report Pass
5/18/23  
Report Pass
5/18/23  
Refer
6/1/23  
Engrossed
5/24/23  
Engrossed
5/24/23  
Refer
7/3/23  
Refer
6/1/23  
Report Pass
7/11/23  
Refer
7/3/23  
Report Pass
7/11/23  
Report Pass
9/1/23  
Refer
7/11/23  
Enrolled
9/12/23  
Report Pass
9/1/23  
Report Pass
9/1/23  
Chaptered
10/13/23  
Enrolled
9/12/23  
Enrolled
9/12/23  
Chaptered
10/13/23  
Passed
10/13/23  

Caption

Jurisdiction: small claims and limited civil case.

Impact

By expanding the monetary limits within small claims and limited civil cases, SB 71 seeks to ease the burden on higher courts while still allowing individuals to seek justice within a straightforward framework. Proponents of the bill believe that this adjustment will facilitate quicker resolutions for common disputes, such as consumer issues and small debts, which disproportionately affect everyday citizens. The amendments are viewed as a step towards making legal proceedings more accessible to those who may not have the resources to engage in complex litigation.

Summary

Senate Bill No. 71 redefines jurisdictional limits for small claims and limited civil cases within California's court system. This legislation increases the jurisdiction of small claims court for individuals from a maximum of $10,000 to $12,500, allowing more cases to be heard within that court. Additionally, it raises the threshold for limited civil cases from $25,000 to $35,000, effectively enabling higher monetary claims to be processed without moving to more extensive court systems. The revisions aim to streamline and provide greater access to legal recourse for individuals with lower-stakes disputes.

Sentiment

The general sentiment around SB 71 appears to be predominantly positive among supporters who see it as a necessary reform to make the legal system more accommodating for the average citizen. However, there are also concerns raised by a small faction—mainly those interested in ensuring thorough case review and overhauling existing judicial processes—who argue that increasing the limits could lead to a heavier caseload on small claims courts without adequate resources to manage them. Nevertheless, the bill received unanimous support during voting, indicating broad legislative backing.

Contention

While the bill has been largely supported, some contention exists regarding the potential impact of increased limits. Critics worry that overburdening the small claims court with more substantial claims could result in longer wait times for justice and more complex cases that might not fit the small claims model. Additionally, adjustments to filing fees and the potential need for legal representation for larger claims may inadvertently exclude some individuals from fully benefiting from the revamped small claims process.

Companion Bills

No companion bills found.

Similar Bills

CA AB3281

Judiciary omnibus.

CA AB2570

False Claims Act.

CA SB799

False claims: taxation.

AL SB84

Filing fees, not required for certain qualified domestic relations orders

CA AB1756

Committee on Judiciary: judiciary omnibus.

VA SB1291

General district courts; increases jurisdictional limits.

CA AB1270

False Claims Act.

CA AB1757

Accessibility: internet websites.