California 2025-2026 Regular Session

California Assembly Bill AB515

Introduced
2/10/25  
Refer
3/13/25  
Report Pass
3/13/25  
Refer
3/17/25  
Report Pass
4/8/25  
Refer
4/8/25  
Report Pass
4/23/25  
Engrossed
5/1/25  
Refer
5/1/25  
Refer
5/14/25  
Report Pass
7/3/25  
Refer
7/3/25  
Report Pass
7/16/25  
Refer
7/16/25  

Caption

Trial: statement of decision.

Impact

The bill's amendments will significantly alter the process for requesting and issuing statements of decision in trials. It imposes a new requirement for all trials conducted by the court to have a written request for a statement of decision, which is to be served on all parties involved in the trial. Additionally, it extends the time for court clerks to enter judgments to 30 days after the filing of a decision or after a statement of decision becomes final. These changes aim to streamline court operations and provide better documentation for litigants.

Summary

Assembly Bill 515, introduced by Assembly Member Pacheco, aims to amend and add provisions in the California Code of Civil Procedure relating to trial procedures. The bill focuses on the requirements for issuing a statement of decision in civil trials, which explains the court's reasoning behind its decisions. Under the existing law, parties can request a statement within 10 days after a tentative decision; AB 515 proposes that all requests must be made in writing or verbally if a record is kept. This shift aims to enhance clarity and standardization in the decision-making process of civil courts.

Sentiment

Overall, the sentiment surrounding AB 515 appears to be mixed, with proponents arguing that the clarity and structured process will benefit litigants by reducing confusion and allowing for better legal recourse through identified objection pathways. Critics, however, might view the increased procedural requirements as potentially burdensome, fearing it may prolong case processing times and complicate the judicial process.

Contention

A notable point of contention among stakeholders is the potential for increased workload on court systems, given the new procedural requirements. Additionally, the provisions allowing courts to require litigants to draft statements of decision could raise concerns about fairness, particularly for self-represented litigants. The amendment's impact on timely justice may also be debated, as extending periods for decision-making could delay outcomes in civil disputes.

Companion Bills

No companion bills found.

Previously Filed As

CA AB3184

Elections: signature verification statements, unsigned ballot identification statements, and reports of ballot rejections.

CA SB1392

Criminal procedure: competence to stand trial.

CA SB1323

Criminal procedure: competence to stand trial.

CA AB1584

Criminal procedure: competence to stand trial.

CA SB92

Labor Code Private Attorneys General Act of 2004.

CA AB2125

Judicial officers: disqualification.

CA AB1822

Criminal defendant: mental competency to stand trial.

CA SB577

Insurance.

CA AB3129

Health care system consolidation.

CA AB2930

Automated decision systems.

Similar Bills

No similar bills found.