CaseLiteby Caseway
Search

California Rules of Court

Updated 2026-08-04 · 438 documents

Browse alphabetically

All0–9ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ
TitleCitationDate
Plaintiff and Appellant, v. PETE FOWLER CONSTRUCTION SERVICES, INC. — Court of Appeal Opiniond5b24ab605b23150430c029f2e4259fcc00bc7a1—
California Rules of Court — Rule 5.534 — General provisions—all proceedings (a)–(l) * * * (m) Caregiver notice and right to be heard (§§ 290.1–297, 366.21) 5 6 7 8 For cases filed under section 300 et seq.: 9 (1) For any child who has been removed from the home, the court must 10 ensure that notice of statutory review hearings, permanency hearings, 11 and section 366.26 hearings has been provided to the current caregiver 12 of the child, including foster parents, preadoptive parents, relative 13 caregivers, and nonrelative extended family members. Notice of 14 dispositional hearings also must be provided to these individuals when 15 the dispositional hearing is serving as a permanency hearing under 16 17 section 361.5(f). 18 (2) The current caregiver has the right to be heard in each proceeding listed 19 in paragraph (1), including the right to submit information about the 20 child to the court before the hearing. Written information about the 21 child may be submitted to the court using the Caregiver Information 22 23 Form (form JV-290) or in the form of a letter to the court. 24 (3) At least 10 calendar days before each hearing listed in paragraph (1), 25 26 the social worker must provide to the current caregiver: 27 (A) A summary of his or her recommendations for disposition, and 28 29 any recommendations for change in custody or status; (B) Caregiver Information Form (form JV-290); and 30 31 (C) Instruction Sheet for Caregiver Information Form (form JV-290- 32 33 34 INFO). 35 (4) If the caregiver chooses to provide written information to the court 36 using form JV-290 or by letter, the caregiver must follow the 37 procedures set forth below. The court may waive any element of this 38 39 40 process for good cause. 1Cal. R. Ct. 5.534—
Plaintiff and Respondent, v. JACK ESPINO — Court of Appeal Opinionb0185d31133dc3b48e0a0285fa5e2a0122f246fc—
Commission of InvestigationCCC-267138—
Plaintiff and Respondent, v. DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION et al. — Court of Appeal Opinion994014db7591ce18107be220c5ee981e4046b4ff—
Plaintiff and Respondent, v. TEHAMA COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL AND WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT — Court of Appeal Opiniond36231246983051249472e44cce29217f62f02fe—
Emergency Medical Services AgencyCCC-262010—
CALIFORNIA UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE APPEALS BOARDCCC-235903—
Plaintiff and Respondent, v. JAMES WILLIAM BRAMMER — Court of Appeal Opinion (B336058)B336058—
Plaintiffs and Appellants, v. MUHAMMAD ALGHANNAM — Court of Appeal Opinion035748f3805f9d8764128890cdf1cdba52e3fd5a—
Plaintiff and Respondent, v. EUGENE L. SACCO — Court of Appeal Opinion (B350634)B350634—
https://www.facebook.com/legal/terms/plain_text_termsCCC-245203—
FELONY SENTENCING AFTERCCC-259956—
Plaintiff and Appellant, v. SAN DIEGO COUNTY EMPLOYEES RETIREMENT ASSOCIATION — Court of Appeal Opinion5383bdf66066765c34aff83e27a7cea264fd6c0d—
AMENDMENT TO THE CALIFORNIA RULES OF COURTCal. R. Ct. 10.50—
Plaintiff and Respondent, v. DEPARTMENT OF MOTOR VEHICLES — Court of Appeal Opinion6e3f04a831065ee987eb66321dda98f939da4280—
Rules 3.670 and 5.324 of the California Rules of Court are amended effective July 1,Cal. R. Ct. 3.670—
Plaintiff and Respondent, v. DANIEL OROZCO — Court of Appeal Opinion (B329413)B329413—
Plaintiff and Appellant, v. COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES — Court of Appeal Opinion (B336980)B336980—
California Rules of Court — Rule 3.1800 — Default judgments (effective on January 1, 2018, and January 1, 2019 Rule 3)Cal. R. Ct. 3.1800—
Plaintiffs and Appellants, v. TRANSAMERICA LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY — Court of Appeal Opiniona35a13e04155a271c83c11010914d5ffff77c207—
Waterworks. Industrial. Commercial. | Keenan SupplyCCC-253295—
Plaintiff and Appellant, v. THOMAS M. PAPEZ — Court of Appeal Opinion32b9d3623653b990b7be536c9e2c320e7496bfe6—
Plaintiff and Appellant, v. RICARDO LARA, as Insurance Commissioner, etc. — Court of Appeal Opinion (B336043)B336043—
California Rules of Court Amendments (effective July 1, 2019 1 Appendix B 2 Liability Limits of a Parent or Guardian Having Custody and Control of a Minor 3 for the Torts of a Minor (Civ)bb4472c9cff539f99bc9ff92f464c0b14868f0de—
= — — = = = = = — — — — — = = = — = = — = = — — = E = = — = = — — — = = = — = — — — — — = i = = = i w W = w C = = = = = =CCC-279737—
Plaintiff and Respondent, v. I.H. — Court of Appeal Opinion83cb83cfa4c8e0e678d4497f858fc0d5d4d730fb—
Plaintiff and Appellant, v. NETAPP, INC. — Court of Appeal Opinion21b6926872c7361ffd74f2eb9ff031fc3b31d667—
For More InformationCCC-248130—
Plaintiff and Respondent, v. TATA CONSULTANCY SERVICES, LTD. — Court of Appeal Opinion (B342796)B342796—
California Rules of Court — Rule 10.70 — Task forces, working groups, and other advisory bodies 1 2 (a) Established by Chief Justice or Judicial Council 3 4 The Chief Justice , the Administrative Director of the Courts, or the council may 5 establish task forces and other advisory bodies to work on specific projects that 6 cannot be addressed by the council’s standing advisory committees. These task 7 forces and other advisory bodies may be required to report to one of the internal 8 committees or the Administrative Director, as designated in their charges. 9 10 (Subd (a) lettered and amended effective July 1, 2015; adopted as unlettered subd effective 11 January 1, 1999.) 12 13 (b) Established by Administrative Director 14 15 The Administrative Director may establish working groups to work on specific 16 projects identified by the Administrative Director that address areas and topics 17 within the Administrative Director’s purview. 18 19 (Subd (b) adopted effective July 1, 2015.) 20 21 Rule 10.70 amended effective July 1, 2015; adopted as rule 6.70 effective January 1, 1999; 22 previously renumbered effective January 1, 2007; previously amended effective September 1, 23 2003 and August 14, 2009. 24 25 Rule 10.101. Role of the Judicial Council and Administrative Office of the Courts 26 27 (a) Purpose 28 29 This rule specifies the responsibilities of the Judicial Council, the Chief Justice, the 30 Administrative Director of the Courts, and the Administrative Office of the Courts 31 council staff with respect to the judicial branch budget. 32 33 (Subd (a) amended effective July 1, 2015; previously amended effective January 1, 2005, 34 January 1, 2007, and August 14, 2009.) 35 36 (b) Duties of the Judicial Council 37 38 The Judicial Council must: 39 40 (1) * * * 41 (effective on July 1, 2015 Rule 10)Cal. R. Ct. 10.70—
Division 23. Miscellaneous 1Cal. R. Ct. 3.2300—
Plaintiff and Respondent, v. LAVELL TYRONE PLAYER — Court of Appeal Opinion (B342239)B342239—
Plaintiff and Respondent, v. HUGO JOSE LUA — Court of Appeal Opinion6d986ea5a7c58fdd8624f6d257d285d623ccbdbb—
Petitioner, v. THE SUPERIOR COURT OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY — Court of Appeal Opinion339cfc35287ef0aa67b298047b5528be81c5c270—
Plaintiff and Respondent, v. LACHANCE LARUE THOMAS — Court of Appeal Opinion (F088914)F088914—
E E E = ‘ i i i j = = = ‘ — j — — — — — — —87530a9018c723e11eefd31055dc5f8dc9bdaa7b—
AMENDMENT TO THE CALIFORNIA RULES OF COURTCal. R. Ct. 2.1050—
AMENDMENT TO THE CALIFORNIA RULES OF COURTCal. R. Ct. 4.130—
California Coastal Commission Document 270535CCC-270535—
Plaintiff and Appellant, v. KAISER FOUNDATION HEALTH PLAN, INC. — Court of Appeal Opinion (B337963)B337963—
Plaintiff and Appellant, v. SPECTRUM SECURITY SERVICES, INC. — Court of Appeal Opinion (B338047)B338047—
Petitioner, v. THE SUPERIOR COURT OF LOS ANGELES COUNTY — Court of Appeal Opinion (B340707)B340707—
Chi· na· man ˈchī-nə-mənCCC-089619—
Plaintiff and Respondent, v. RICHARD QUNTAN GARCIA — Court of Appeal Opinion (B330884)B330884—
California Rules of Court — Rule 10.10 — Judic ia l Counc il interna l committees (effective April 16, 2020 Rule 10)Cal. R. Ct. 10.10—
Plaintiff and Appellant, v. JAMES R. GLIDEWELL, DENTAL CERAMICS, INC. — Court of Appeal Opinion1dcfae2fca5fbc5965b658905c7b3d45b58640b0—
Plaintiffs and Appellants, v. ADAM ACOSTA et al. — Court of Appeal Opinion (B340726)B340726—
Plaintiff and Respondent, v. FRANCISCO GONZALEZ — Court of Appeal Opinion (F084952)F084952—
Party | Definition of Party by Merriam-WebsterCCC-245996—
← Previous pagePage 7 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).