CaseLiteby Caseway
Search

California Rules of Court

Updated 2026-08-04 · 438 documents

Browse alphabetically

All0–9ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ
TitleCitationDate
SECTION 10: WORK WEEK GROUPSCCC-244751—
Plaintiff and Respondent, v. GREGORY LAMONT BROWN — Court of Appeal Opinione7bb967b3804f8df6fc25816b24f1b44b1a001d4—
California Rules of Court — Rule 8.66 — Exte nding Tolling or exte nding time because of public emergency (effective Immediately Rule 8)Cal. R. Ct. 8.66—
Assessors' Handbook (AH)CCC-266590—
Appellant, v. MICHAEL HOCH — Court of Appeal Opiniondc7c50647db864e0dde244ab6da69a6fde8464e2—
Plaintiff and Respondent, v. J.L. et al. — Court of Appeal Opinion842ab1533300a55cf2e89930d01bf8b1e665822e—
Plaintiffs and Appellants, v. CALIFORNIA COASTAL COMMISSION — Court of Appeal Opinion (B347601)B347601—
Plaintiff and Appellant, v. JACOB FREDERICK BALL — Court of Appeal Opinion0ef2e6499b414f5e9151afd3150491f790713659—
California Rules of Court — Rule 5.482 — Proceedings after notice 1 2 (a)–(b) * * * 3 4 (c) When there is information or response from a tribe that requires additional 5 steps 6 7 If after notice has been provided as required by federal and state law a tribe 8 responds indicating that the child is eligible for membership if certain steps are 9 followed, the court must proceed as if the child is an Indian child and direct the 10 appropriate individual or agency to provide active efforts under rule 5.484(c) to 11 secure tribal membership for the child. 12 13 14 (d)(c) When there is no information or response from a tribe 15 16 * * * 17 (Subd (c) relettered effective August 15, 2016; adopted as subd (d); previously amended 18 effective January 1, 2013.) 19 20 (e)(d) Intervention 21 22 * * * 23 (Subd (d) relettered effective August 15, 2016; adopted as subd (e); previously amended 24 effective January 1, 2013.) 25 26 (f)(e) Posthearing actions 27 28 * * * 29 (Subd (e) relettered effective August 15, 2016; adopted as subd (f); previously amended 30 effective January 1, 2013.) 31 32 (g)(f) Consultation with tribe 33 34 * * * 35 (Subd (f) relettered effective August 15, 2016; adopted as subd (g); previously amended 36 effective July 1, 2013.) 37 38 Rule 5.482 amended effective August 15, 2016; adopted effective January 1, 2008; previously 39 amended effective January 1, 2013, and July 1, 2013. 40 41 (effective on August 15, 2016 Rule 5)Cal. R. Ct. 5.482—
Plaintiff and Respondent, v. TIMOTHY DWAYNE CLAYTON — Court of Appeal Opinion (B341021)B341021—
AMENDMENT TO THE CALIFORNIA RULES OF COURTCal. R. Ct. 1.51—
Population of Sacramento County, CA - Census 2010 and 2000 Interactive Map, Demo gr. ..CCC-082101—
AMENDMENT TO THE CALIFORNIA RULES OF COURTCal. R. Ct. 3.722—
Sheriff Department | Trinity County https://www.trinitycounty.org/Sheriff-DepartmentCCC-249792—
Plaintiff and Respondent, v. G.D. — Court of Appeal Opinion (B341706)B341706—
AMENDMENT TO THE CALIFORNIA RULES OF COURTCal. R. Ct. 2.255—
California Rules of Court — Rule 14.5 — Certificate of interested entities or personsCal. R. Ct. 14.5—
Plaintiffs and Appellants, v. PMF CA REIT, LLC, et al. — Court of Appeal Opinion (B337927)B337927—
Further | Definition of Further by Merriam-WebsterCCC-254599—
California Rules of Court — Rule 3.1365 — Petitions under the California Environmental Quality ActCal. R. Ct. 3.1365—
Plaintiff and Respondent, v. RYAN ANTHONY NELSON — Court of Appeal Opinion (B342722)B342722—
Outpatient Procedures for 2024CCC-280018—
California Rules of Court — Rule 2.503 — Public access (effective on January 1, 2012 Rule 2)Cal. R. Ct. 2.503—
Rule 9.9.5. Attorney Fingerprinting 1Cal. R. Ct. 9.9.5—
California Rules of Court — Rule 4.452 — Determinate sentence consecutive to prior determinate sentence (effective July 1, 2019 Rule 4)Cal. R. Ct. 4.452—
Plaintiff and Respondent, v. JOSE DE LA CRUZ — Court of Appeal Opinion (B341725)B341725—
California Rules of Court — Rule 9 — Tolling statutes of limitations for civil causes of action (effective May 29, 2020 Emergency rule 9)Cal. R. Ct. 9—
Rule 9.10. Authority of the State Bar Cour t 1Cal. R. Ct. 9.10—
Rule 9.7. Online reporting by attorneys 1Cal. R. Ct. 9.7—
Petitioner, v. THE SUPERIOR COURT OF ORANGE COUNTY — Court of Appeal Opinion05b5ad562219675ab7141a82d0809a2249f42295—
California Rules of Court — Rule 5.707 — Review or dispositional hearing requirements for child approaching 1 majority (§§ 224.1, 366(a)(1)(F), 366.3, 366.31, 16501.1(f)(16)) (effective January 1, 2021 Rule 5)Cal. R. Ct. 5.707—
Plaintiff and Respondent, v. VINCENT LANCE CARNES — Court of Appeal Opinion (B338217)B338217—
Twelve Point Pension Reform PlanCCC-247095—
AMENDMENT TO THE CALIFORNIA RULES OF COURTCal. R. Ct. 3.2200—
STATEMENT OF VOTE SUMMARY PAGESCCC-259999—
Executions by Year | Death Penalty Information CenterCCC-095076—
Employers steal billions fromCCC-241812—
Plaintiff and Respondent, v. MARCOS ANTONIO JIMENEZ et al. — Court of Appeal Opinion59614af262f7399bf78e0fe9917fd4e76af507ec—
AMENDMENT TO THE CALIFORNIA RULES OF COURTCRC amend. January 19, 2024—
Plaintiffs and Appellants, v. YURI SHEFLER — Court of Appeal Opinion (B338608)B338608—
Comment, par. 2, concerning rule 8.1115(e)(3)).F088041—
Plaintiff and Respondent, v. QUINDALE DAVID POWELL — Court of Appeal Opinion3c8ad0603b881087acbcaf1d8523935d9fe3a263—
AMENDMENT TO THE CALIFORNIA RULES OF COURT8ebed9eec8e49684e29427ace53c8285b60218ea—
California Rules of Court — Rule 5.664 — Indian Child Welfare Act (25 U.S.C. § 1901 et seq.) (effective on January 1, February 23, and July 1, 2007 Rule 5)Cal. R. Ct. 5.664—
California Rules of Court — Rule 2.1040 — Electronic recordings presented or offered into evidence (effective on July 1, 2011, and July 1, 2012)Cal. R. Ct. 2.1040—
California superior courts crisisCCC-287285—
California Executive Order N-09-19 — S173784 Link4CCC-173784—
“N ot in it for Justice”CCC-277910—
Plaintiff and Respondent, v. DEON STACEY FITE — Court of Appeal Opinion (B340187)B340187—
California Rules of Court — Rule 4.220 — Remote video proceedings in traffic infraction cases 1 2 (a) Authorization for pilot project remote video proceedings 3 4 (1) With the approval of the Judicial Council, a A superior court may establish 5 by local rule a pilot project through December 31, 2015, to permit 6 arraignments, trials, and related proceedings concerning the traffic infractions 7 specified in (b) to be conducted by two-way remote video communication 8 methods under the conditions stated below. 9 10 (2) To obtain approval of the Judicial Council to conduct a pilot project for 11 remote video proceedings under this rule, a court must submit an application 12 to the council that includes details on what procedures and forms the court 13 intends to institute for processing cases in the pilot project. 14 15 (Subd (a) amended effective September 1, 2015.) 16 17 (b) * * * 18 19 (c) Application 20 21 This rule establishes the minimum procedural requirements and options for courts 22 that conduct a pilot project for remote video proceedings for cases in which a 23 defendant is charged with an infraction as defined in (b) and the defendant’s 24 requests to proceed according to this rule is for a trial or related proceeding that is 25 set for a date after January 31, 2013. 26 27 (Subd (c) amended effective September 1, 2015.) 28 29 (d) * * * 30 31 (e) Scope of court pilot project Required procedures and forms and request by 32 defendant 33 34 A court that conducts remote video proceedings under this rule must comply with 35 the The following procedures and use the required forms in this section must be 36 included in the court’s pilot project for remote video proceedings. In addition to 37 following the standard provisions for processing traffic infraction cases, the 38 defendant may request to proceed by remote video proceeding as provided below. 39 40 (1)–(2) * * * 41 (effective on September 1, 2015 Rule 4)Cal. R. Ct. 4.220—
← Previous pagePage 6 of 9 · 438 documentsNext page →

About this database — California Rules of Court

California primary law. Statutes/codes and bills live in LegInfo bulk on disk; regulations (CCR) are not available from a free official scrape (Westlaw-gated).