Real questions, answered on the record.
Send a question about a California appeal, a pending motion, or a piece of civil procedure that isn't sitting right. Selected questions get answered publicly — with the case law behind them — so the answer helps you and the next person searching for the same thing. Send questions in confidence; only anonymized versions are published, and asking a question does not create an attorney-client relationship.
Recent questions
Tap a question to see the short answer. Follow the link at the bottom of any answer for the full analysis with citations.
-
Appellate The trial court entered judgment against my client on June 1. When exactly does the notice of appeal have to be filed?
The short answer in an unlimited civil case is that the outside deadline is the earliest of: 60 days after the clerk serves a filed-endorsed copy of the judgment or a Notice of Entry; 60 days after a party serves the same on the appellant; or 180 days after entry of judgment, if no one served anything. (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 8.104(a).) The 180-day catch-all disappears the moment either the clerk or a party serves a proper Notice of Entry — so a lawyer who assumes the 180-day floor is available almost always miscounts.
Two traps in your fact pattern: (1) if any party files a valid post-trial motion (new trial, JNOV, reconsideration, motion to vacate under CCP § 663), the clock is extended under rule 8.108, but only if the motion is timely and served on the appellant; (2) June 1 was entry — but the 60-day clock does not start until service, and the record has to show which triggering document was served.
-
Motion practice Opposing counsel served an anti-SLAPP motion the day before I was going to amend. Can I still amend to moot the motion?
No — and this is one of the harshest procedural rules in California civil practice. Once an anti-SLAPP motion is filed under CCP § 425.16, the plaintiff loses the automatic right to amend the challenged claim as of right, even if the deadline under CCP § 472 has not yet passed. (Simmons v. Allstate Ins. Co. (2001) 92 Cal.App.4th 1068, 1073–1074.) The rule exists because the anti-SLAPP statute is designed to test the merits of the pleading as filed; letting the plaintiff amend around the motion would defeat the point.
What you can still do is oppose on the merits and try to make the second-prong showing of minimal merit. The court can consider evidence beyond the pleading, so you are not stuck with what you drafted — you are stuck with the theory.
-
Litigation The other side keeps missing discovery deadlines. When is it worth filing a § 128.7 motion versus a plain motion to compel?
They serve different purposes and are proved with different evidence. A motion to compel targets the discovery misconduct itself: late responses, boilerplate objections, missing documents. Section 128.7 targets the pleading — the complaint, cross-complaint, or defense the other side signed and is now maintaining without evidentiary or legal support. The safe harbor is 21 days; you serve the motion first, and if the offending pleading isn't withdrawn or corrected in that window, you file it.
If the discovery pattern is really about a claim the other side cannot prove, § 128.7 is the sharper tool because the sanction reaches all fees caused by maintaining the frivolous pleading, not just the fees on one motion. But the standard is stringent and the safe harbor is unforgiving — file the notice one day too early and the motion fails as a matter of law.
-
Appellate The Court of Appeal affirmed my case. Is there any point in a petition for rehearing before I petition the Supreme Court?
Sometimes yes, and it matters more than most litigators realize. A petition for rehearing under rule 8.268 is the only way to correct a factual misstatement or an omitted issue in the opinion — and if the Supreme Court later grants review, the record it sees is the opinion as it stands. If the panel got a fact wrong or ignored an argument that was properly briefed and argued, rehearing is the mechanism to fix it.
What rehearing is not for: reargument. Panels almost never change their minds on the merits. The best rehearing petitions read like errata — short, precise, targeted at a specific factual error or omitted issue, with pinpoint citations to the record and briefs.
-
Litigation My contract has an arbitration clause but the other side sued in Superior Court. How fast do I need to move on a motion to compel?
Fast. Under CCP § 1281.2, the right to compel arbitration can be waived by conduct inconsistent with an intent to arbitrate — and the case law construes "inconsistent conduct" broadly. Filing an answer alone is usually fine; filing a cross-complaint, propounding merits discovery, opposing merits motions on the merits, or generally litigating for months before invoking the clause all carry waiver risk. (St. Agnes Medical Center v. PacifiCare of California (2003) 31 Cal.4th 1187, 1196.)
Practical rule: file the motion to compel arbitration as your first substantive appearance, or as close to it as possible. If discovery has already been served on you, respond narrowly and preserve the arbitration objection in writing before you produce anything on the merits.
Send a question.
Use the form below to submit a question. Include enough facts to make the question answerable — jurisdiction, procedural posture, and the specific rule or issue that is troubling you. Selected questions are answered publicly in anonymized form. Confidential matters and prospective representations are handled through intake instead.
Have a matter that isn't a question — it's a case?
If you need representation on an appeal, a writ, or a dispositive motion, skip the Q&A form and go straight to a consultation.