(a) [Applicability] This rule applies to the service of
pleadings in civil cases except for unlawful detainer actions,
proceedings under the Family Code, and other proceedings for which
different service requirements are prescribed by law.
(b) [Service of complaint] The complaint must be served
on all named defendants and proofs of service on those defendants
must be filed with the court within 60 days after the filing of
the complaint. When the complaint is amended to add a defendant,
the added defendant must be served and proof of service must be
filed within 30 days after the filing of the amended complaint.
(c) [Service of cross-complaint] A
cross-complaint against a party who has appeared in the action
must be accompanied by proof of service of the cross-complaint
at the time it is filed. If the cross-complaint adds new parties,
the cross-complaint must be served on all parties and proofs of
service on the new parties must be filed within 30 days of the
filing of the cross-complaint.
(d) [Timing of responsive pleadings] The
parties may stipulate without leave of court to one 15-day extension
beyond the 30-day time period prescribed for the response after
service of the initial complaint.
(e) [Modification of timing; application
for order extending time] The court, on its own motion or
on the application of a party, may extend or otherwise modify
the times provided in (b)-(d). An application for a court order
extending the time to serve a pleading must be filed before the
time for service has elapsed. The application must be accompanied
by a declaration showing why service has not been effected, documenting
the efforts that have been made to effect service, and specifying
the date by which service is proposed to be effected.
(f) [Failure to serve] Unless the court
has granted an order extending the time to serve a complaint or
cross-complaint, the failure to serve and file pleadings as required
under this rule may result in an Order to Show Cause being issued
as to why sanctions shall not be imposed.
(g) [Request for entry of default]
If a responsive pleading is not served within the time limits
specified in this rule and no extension of time has been granted,
the plaintiff within 10 days after the time for service has elapsed
must file a request for entry of default. Failure to timely file
the request for the entry of default may result in an Order to
Show Cause being issued as to why sanctions shall not be imposed.
(h) [Default judgment] When a default
is entered, the party who requested the entry of default must
obtain a default judgment against the defaulting party within
45 days after entry of default, unless the court has granted an
extension of time. Failure to obtain entry of judgment against
a defaulting party or to request an extension of time to apply
for a default judgment may result in an Order to Show Cause being
issued as to why sanctions shall not be imposed.
(i) [Order to Show Cause] When the
court issues an Order to Show Cause under this rule, responsive
papers to the Order to Show Cause must be filed and served no
less than 5 calendar days before the hearing.
Rule 201.7 adopted effective July 1, 2002.
Drafter's Notes:
2002-The California Rules of Court
relating to civil case management were amended to reflect modern
case management practices. Many obsolete provisions relating to
case management are eliminated. The amended rules provide a comprehensive
approach to the management of civil cases in the trial courts.
The main features of the rules include:
New rule 201.7 prescribes the time for
service of pleadings in civil cases. This rule will replace the
various local rules on this subject.
The rules on differential case management
are relocated and renumbered.
The main rule on case management (rule
212) is amended and requires case management review of all civil
cases, except for certain expressly exempted types. The review
must take place within 180 days after the filing of the complaint
and will generally take place at a case management conference.
The time and manner of giving notice of
the case management conference or review will be left to local
rule. (Rule 212(b)(1).) Courts should have local rules or procedures
for the scheduling of case management conferences and local forms
for notices for these conferences, consistent with rule 212, available
by July 1, 2002.
Although case management conferences will
be held in most cases, a court may determine that conferences
need not be held on a case-by-case basis and may notify the parties
that they need not appear. (Rule 212 (b)(2).) Also, a court may
adopt a local rule providing that in limited civil cases parties
need not attend a conference unless ordered to do so by the court.
(Rule 212(b)(3).) This exception for limited civil cases was included
at the request of a few courts with large volumes of such cases.
Any court desiring to exercise the option to exclude limited civil
cases from the holding of case management conferences must adopt
a local rule on the subject by July 1, 2002.
At the case management conference, counsel
for each party and each self-represented person must appear personally
unless a local court rule authorized by rule 298(c)(2) permits
a telephonic appearance. Courts may wish to review their local
rules to determine if telephonic appearances should be permitted,
if their rules do not already authorize this.
Regardless whether or not the case review
involves a case management conference, in each case a case management
order must be issued. (Rules 212(b)(3) and 212(i).)
Parties will be required to submit a Case
Management Statement (form CM-110) fifteen days before the date
scheduled for the conference or review. (Rule 212(c). This standard
statewide form is mandatory. It will replace all local case management,
status conference, at-issue, or other similar statements previously
used. The fifteen-day period is provided so that courts will have
sufficient time to review all statements submitted and, if appropriate,
issue orders and notify parties that they need not appear in particular
cases.
New rule 214 clarifies the management of
short cause cases.
The Judicial Council has directed the Civil
and Small Claims Advisory Committee to review the new case management
processes after the rules have been in effect for a year. Thus,
every court will have an opportunity to provide comments and suggestions
on the rules and form in the future.
